« The Shrine in the Praesidium of Dios (Eastern Desert of Egypt): Graffiti and Oracles in...

CHIRONMITTEILUNGEN

DER KOMMISSION FÜRALTE GESCHICHTE UND

EPIGRAPHIKDES DEUTSCHEN

ARCHÄOLOGISCHENINSTITUTS

Sonderdruck aus Band 40 · 2010

DE GRUYTER

INHALT DES 40. BANDES (2010)

Julien Aliquot, Laodicée-sur-mer et les fondations de l’empereur Constance

Dimitris Bosnakis – Klaus Hallof, Alte und neue Inschriften aus Kos IV

Hélène Cuvigny, The Shrine in the praesidium of Dios (Eastern Desert of Egypt):Graffiti and Oracles in Context

Werner Eck, Weihungen an Iupiter Optimus Maximus Heliopolitanus, Venus undMerkur in Beirut und in Obergaliläa

Norbert Ehrhardt – Wolfgang Günther, Neue Grabinschriften aus Milet

Denis Feissel, Laodicée de Syrie sous l’empereur Julien d’après des lettres mécon-nues de Libanios

Christopher P. Jones, Kinship (syggwneia) in Two Cities of the Troad

Rafah Jouejati – Rudolf Haensch, Les inscriptions d’une église extraordinaire àTell Aar dans la Syria II

Clemens Koehn, Pompeius, Cassius und Augustus. Bemerkungen zum imperiummaius

John Ma, Autour des balles de fronde «camiréennes»

Laurianne Martinez-Sève, Pouvoir et religion dans la Bactriane hellénistique.Recherches sur la politique religieuse des rois séleucides et gréco-bactriens

Helmut Müller, Ein Kultverein von Asklepiasten bei einem attalidischen Phrou-rion im Yüntdag

Robert Parker, A Funerary Foundation from Hellenistic Lycia

Patrick Sänger, Kommunikation zwischen Prätorianerpräfekt und Statthalter:Eine Zweitschrift von IvE Ia 44

Pierre Sánchez, EPI RVMAIKVI UANATVI dans le décret pour Ménippos deColophon: «pour la mort d’un Romain» ou «en vue d’un supplice romain»?

Sebastian Schmidt-Hofner, Ehrensachen. Ranggesetzgebung, Elitenkonkurrenzund die Funktionen des Rechts in der Spätantike

Peter Weiss – Niels Draskowski, Neue griechische Schleuderbleie. Tissaphernesund weitere Kommandeure

Michael Wörrle, Epigraphische Forschungen zur Geschichte Lykiens VIII. Einptolemäisches Prostagma aus Limyra über Mißstände beim Steuereinzug

The Shrine in the praesidium of Dios 245

HÉLÈNE CUVIGNY

The Shrine in the praesidium of Dios (Eastern Desert of Egypt):Graffiti and Oracles in Context1

I. Introduction

Under the principate, an important part of the trade between the Roman Empire andthe Erythraean world (India, South Arabia, the Horn of Africa) passed through theRed Sea harbours of Myos Hormos and Berenice and the customs warehouses in Kop-tos on the Nile. Koptos was linked to both harbours by two roads along which Romanfortlets (praesidia) were built at intervals: the Berenice road (ÇdÌ« Beren›kh«) and theMyos Hormos road (ÇdÌ« Mysormitik‹) (fig. 1). Several praesidia on both roads havebeen excavated within the framework of a French research program on the Romanpresence in the Eastern Desert.2 Dios is one of these praesidia on the road to Berenice.It is known as Iovis in the Itinerarium Antonini, but as Dios in the Tabula Peutin-geriana, the Ravenna Cosmography, and the ostraca found in the excavations3 (fig. 2).

By the end of Augustus’ reign, the Berenice road had superseded the Myos Hormosroad in importance. Around AD 50, Pliny the Elder enumerates, with fairly correctdistances, the stopping places where caravans used to rest or to water at wells, sparse atthat time. Most fortlets did not exist yet: several praesidia, furnished with a well andcisterns, were built in 76/77.4 The praesidium at Bi’r Bayza, situated ca. 6 km south ofDios was probably one of them. For unknown reasons (water shortage?), it was soonabandoned and replaced by Dios in 114/115. This date is provided by the dedicationfound at Dios on the first day of excavation.

1 Four excavation campaigns took place at Dios between 2005 and 2009. Excavators wereE. Botte, J.-P. Brun and M. Reddé. I am grateful to Adam Bülow-Jacobsen for various cor-rections and suggestions and for reviewing my English. He is also the author of the photographsof the inscriptions and ostraca. I would also like to thank Jean Bingen for his friendly advice onseveral epigraphical matters.

2 This program, directed by myself, is financed by the French Foreign Office and the IFAO.3 But Ioues in the only Latin ostracon where the toponym occurs (inv. 922).4 Bagnall et al. 2001.

246 Hélène Cuvigny

1 inv. 262 114/115SU 15302 max. dim. 67.5 × 57 × 11 cm fig. 3

The slab was found between the two towers on each side of the gate of the praesidium.The stone is a hard, coarse shellbearing limestone (Muschelkalk), extracted in quarriessituated in the Eastern Desert between Qûs (Apollonopolis Parva) and al-Laqîta(Phoinikôn).5 The dedications of the praesidia of Didymoi and Aphrodites (76/77) areof the same material.

The text starts with the imperial titulature in the dative. Although commemoratingthe building of a fort, the inscription is also a dedication to the emperor. Roman andlocal elements are mixed, as is often the case in Latin epigraphical documents fromEgypt. Thus the consulates have been omitted, replaced by the Alexandrian regnalyear, and the number after the tribunate has been left out.

The inscribed surface is surrounded by a border. Light guide-lines are visible here and there.No trace of whitewashing or rubrication. Letter-height: l. 1 = 8 cm, ll. 2–4 = 6 cm, ll. 5–6 = 5 cm.Lines 1–3 centered.

Imp(eratori) • Neruae • Traiano [•] Optimo •Caesari • Aug(usto) • Germ(anico) • Dacico • pont(ifici) •max(imo) • trib(unicia) • pot(estate) • p(atri) • p(atriae) • anno • XIX •

4 M • Rutilius • Lupus • praef(ectus) • Aegypti •per • L • Cassium • Taurinum [•] p[rae]f(ectum) • mont(is) •praesidium • ex f•und!ament"o•[–4?-]•b• u• it •

5 mont

«To the emperor Nerva Trajanus Optimus Caesar Augustus, victor over the Germansand the Dacians, chief priest, holder of the tribunician power, Father of the Father-land, in the 19th year, Marcus Rutilius Lupus, prefect of Egypt, [built? rebuilt?] thefort from its foundation, under the direction of Lucius Cassius Taurinus, prefect of thedesert.»

3. The number after the tribunate is also omitted in other Latin inscriptions from Egypt: ILS8907 (Trajan, Syene quarries); Breccia, IGL Alex. 69 (Antoninus Pius, Luqsor).

4. M. Rutilius Lupus is attested as prefect of Egypt between 28th Jan. 113 and 5th Jan. 117.5. This prefect of the desert is otherwise attested in O.Krok. 60 and 65. Here per is equivalent to

curam agente, which expresses the intervention of the prefect of the Desert in the dedicationof the three praesidia whose construction was ordered by the prefect of Egypt Iulius Ursus(Bagnall et al. 2001).

6. No verb seems to be compatible with the traces. -uxit and -auit are excluded. The letter be-fore u• it has a loop which reminds of b or s (but posuit is too short).

5 Cl. Traunecker, Le calcaire des temples romains de la région coptite, in: Chr. Karl-hausen – Th. De Putter (ed.), Pierres égyptiennes. Chefs-d’œuvre pour l’éternité, 2000,103–105.


In January 2008 workers were put to remove the sand from one of the barrack-roomsalong the western wall which, at this place, is 1.90 m large and 2.35 m high. Inscrip-tions and sculpted objects began to appear: we had found the aedes of the praesidium.

The shrine (= room 52) is situated south to the main gate from which it is separatedby room 53, where a staircase leads to the rampart walk (fig. 4 and 5a, b). Three largecisterns are located 2.50 m to the south. Cistern 3 was completely emptied. At its bot-tom, we found a layer of rubbish which belongs to the last period of occupation. Oneof the ostraca found there contains the latest date ever found, up to now, in any of thepraesidia excavated on the roads of the Mons Berenices: year 3 or 6 of Philip the Arab(245/246 or 248/249).6

This aedes is not the original shrine. It replaced former barracks as is shown by thefact that wall 8 of the shrine was built over bench 18 which is still visible in room 49A.The Trajanic shrine may have been in another part of the fort. In Maximianon andQusûr al-Banât, two forts which we had excavated earlier on the Myos Hormos road,7it was in the axis of the gate. That was not the case in Didymoi, where the shrine whichwe found is considered to be late. In that fort, however, the remnants of an apse wereobserved under later structures against the rear wall and in the axis of the main gate.M. Reddé thinks that this apse belongs to the original aedes.8 There are similarities inthe history of Dios and Didymoi, both on the Berenice road. Their inner organizationhas been modified from the second half of the second century on, especially in the rearzone, practically suppressing any architectural trace of the original disposition. Thehypothesis that the early shrine at Dios was in the rear part of the fort, as in Maximia-non, Qusûr al-Banât and presumably Didymoi, is strengthened by the fact that twoinscriptions (texts n° 2 and 3) were found re-used in that sector, but of course, theycould have been carried there from any part of the fort. It was not a rule, anyway, thatthe praesidia should be built with a shrine set against the rear wall in the axis of thegate: at Bi’r Bayzah, too short-lived a fort to have undergone structural changes, theshrine was erected to the left of the axis, as an isolated structure in the space betweenthe northern row of barracks and the well.

II. Phasing and short archaeological description of the aedes9

Phase 1 (AD 114/115): The area situated south of the main gate shows stairs leadingto the rampart walk and probably already barrack-rooms erected along the westernwall of the fort. Wall 4 is then a strong wall built in schist and granite stone (= wall 4A).

6 O.Dios inv. 1507 (unpublished).7 Cuvigny et al. 2003, I, 248–251.8 Cuvigny et al. (forthcoming).9 The aedes was excavated by Jean-Pierre Brun and Emmanuel Botte. I am indebted to

J.-P. Brun for giving with his usual generosity a summary of his observations, which is the sub-stance of this section.


Phase 2 (after Antoninus Pius): One of these barrack-rooms is equipped with bench18, built on the geological ground. The filling of the bench contained a worn coin (ofthe Hermanoubis type struck in year 22 of Antoninus Pius) and ceramics datablewithin the second half of the second century.10

Phase 3: The barracks are modified, walls 7 and 8 are built (wall 8 passes over bench18).

Phase 4 (fig. 4, 5a, 6): Building of the shrine (internal dimensions: 4.25 × 3.5 m), ofroom 49 (equipped with silos for grain) and probably also of the entire row of roomsbetween the western rampart and cistern 3. By then, wall 4A, preserved only ca. 0.20 mhigh, is topped by wall 4B. Wall 4B presents two faces of schist stones arranged in her-ring-bone pattern and bonded with clay.

In that phase, the main features inside the shrine are a podium, or pedestal, setagainst the western wall for displaying the statues (9), three blocks (10, 11, 12) in frontof the podium and a geometric mosaic floor (SU 15206), similar in style and executionto those discovered in two rooms of the apartment (probably the praetorium) situatedin the NW corner of the fort: the shrine and the praetorium are certainly contempo-rary. The mosaic is made of chips of local white quartz and black schist vertically in-serted. The shrine has two openings: a main, axial entrance (1.20 m) opening to theEast, originally equipped with a double door, and a small, lateral one (height 1.05 m ×width 0.40 m), through wall 4B, which gives access to a staircase with three steps(0.43 m wide) built inside the podium.

The podium (2.25 m long, 0.745 m, wide 1 m high) is a partially hollow parallele-piped built in bricks and stones bonded with chalk mortar (fig. 6). The central part ofthe main face (1.60 m wide) is decorated in opus sectile with graffiti and proskynematainscribed on some of the plates (9, 10, 12). The podium has been modified three timesduring the history of the shrine. During the first stage (= phase 4), the table at the toppresented a flat surface of steatite and sandstone slabs, whereas in the south-westernangle, there was a quadrangular receptacle built with bricks and covered by whiteplaster (internal length: 0.25 m; width: 0.14 m; height: 0.10 m; fig. 7). The above men-tioned stairs inside the podium may have served to give access to the top of the po-dium, for anointing and adorning the statues of the gods.

The remnants of three steatite statues were found broken in the layers of abandon-ment. The seated one is probably Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis on a throne, to whicha clay Cerberus-head is to be associated. The two others are a standing statue inGraeco-Roman style, and the lower part of another standing one in Egyptian style

10 Two costrels from Aswan (Tomber 2006, flagon type 73), a jug (Tomber 2006, flagon type29), two urns and a cooking pot in marl fabric, two jugs in red fabric, one Cretan amphora and abig jug probably imported from the Aegean zone (Type 4 in J.-P. Brun, Amphores égyptienneset importées dans les praesidia romains des routes de Myos Hormos et de Bérénice, in: S. Mar-chand – A. Marangou (ed.), Amphores d’Égypte de la Basse Époque à l’époque arabe II,Cahiers de la céramique égyptienne 8, 2007, 505–523).


(fig. 10). It is possible that they belong to this phase, but their original position is un-known.

The blocks 10, 11, 12 are bases made of brick and stone and covered with plaster.They are contemporary with the mosaic and only the foundations are preserved.Block 10 would be an altar, placed in the axis of the main entrance. Its importance isenhanced by the decoration of the mosaic: in front of it, there is a black rhombus(fig. 8), whereas the rest of the mosaic consists of plain black and white squares.Blocks 11 and 12 are probably the bases of pillars supporting, not the roof of the room,but a baldachin sheltering the altar and the podium.

The dating of phase 4 is uncertain. We are only sure that it is posterior to AntoninusPius. One of the two inscriptions found in the rear part of the fort and presumably be-longing to the first aedes may give a clue (3), because the two only words which subsist,Imperator and Caesar, have been erased. Since the praesidium was built under Trajan,the damnatio memoriae cannot be Domitian’s. As is shown in the introduction to 3,the remains do not fit a titulature of Commodus, but point to Caracalla or SeverusAlexander.

Phase 5 (fig. 6): Two basins, obviously used for new rituals, were built over the mo-saic floor. Basin A blocked the frontal passage leading to the stairs inside the podium,which remained accessible by the lateral door. Perhaps during this phase the top of thepodium was reorganized: the slabs were partially removed and replaced by an aggre-gate of mortar, bricks and stones which sealed the standing statue and four smallwooden pegs. At the time of the discovery, only the lower part of the standing statuewas preserved. It is, as the rest of the stone objects, in local steatite and stood on a basewith a pivot, the feet being moulded in plaster. The four pegs, measuring 6 to 7 by 3cm, are displayed so as to delimit a square, the centre of which is occupied by a hemi-spherical hole (13 cm diam.; fig. 8). The pegs seem to be part of a support maintaininga movable vertical object resting in the central hole. The archaeologists think of avexillum, but I am rather tempted to believe that it is the four legs of Sarapis’ throne.11

This transformation may have taken place independently. The dating of phase 5 is notpossible.

Phase 6: A first, violent destruction of the shrine happens. The podium did notdecay progressively: the sanding up conditions in this desert zone could not havecaused either the partial destruction of the opus sectile, nor the levelling of pillars 10,11, 12. The conclusion is that the shrine was sacked at a time which is not easy to de-fine, but probably during the second quarter of the 3rd century.

Phase 7: The shrine is rebuilt with various reused materials. The staircase inside thepodium is filled and a wall (13, see fig. 5a) is erected to maintain the filling. The oracu-lar ostraca published below were found in this filling, which means that they were

11 Against my idea speaks the smallness of the wooden pegs, which suggests that they sup-ported something light. Note also that this contraption is posterior to the original organizationof the podium.


used in a previous stage, either the original one (phase 4), or phase 5, when a changehad occurred in the rituals as is suggested by the addition of basins.

A stump of a brick pillar was placed horizontally over the top of the podium inorder to create a small lateral wall. Between the standing statue and this partition, a re-used, seated statue (the sitting Sarapis already mentioned) was settled. Several platesfrom the opus sectile of the podium were put in the filling underneath the new pave-ment mainly made of bricks and slabs (SU 15207, see fig. 5b), or re-used in it (fig. 9).At the time of the discovery, the podium bore several objects, viz. from north to south(right to left on fig. 10): a clay lamp, the knees of the sitting Sarapis, the standing statuesealed with mortar. Close to the latter’s back, a coarse steatite statuette of Zeus holdingthe thunder-bolt was found. Note that, in this configuration, there is no room for thestatue of Cerberus near Sarapis. It could, on the other hand, easily be fitted to the leftof the four pegs, which I proposed to interpret as the remnants of Sarapis’ throne.

A precise chronology is impossible because of the absence of dated material. Therelative quality of the repair of the floor could be an indication that this stage occurredduring the occupation of the fort by the army and not during a possible episode ofreoccupation which, in any case, is not documented. Thus phase 7 is probably to bedated before the abandonment of the fort, which is posterior to the middle of the 3rd

century.After the abandonment, a layer of packed sand progressively settled down in the

shrine, which, however, continued to be frequented by travellers: Sisinnios and Nes-torios carved their names on a stone of the podium in the 4th or 5th century (13). Ethio-pians did as well: three graffiti in non-vocalic ge’ez (identified by Christian Robin)were inscribed, one on the podium table, the two others on plates found in the sand.Then the shrine was vandalised again: the statues were broken and their fragments dis-persed in the rooms and in the cistern nearby. Potsherds of Late Roman Amphora 3from Ephesus region and Late Roman Amphora 4 from Gaza found in the layer SU15202 confirm the frequentation of the place during the 4th and the 5th century: theselate, Christian visitors are probably responsible for the final destruction.

III. Two inscriptions from the primitive aedes?

2 Dedication by an architect inv. 261 2nd cent.SU 10106 20 × 10.5 × 27 cm fig. 11

This inscription has not been found in the identified aedes, but in the eastern zoneof the praesidium where it was reused twice as pivot-stone. It comes presumably fromthe former aedes, which we supposed to have been there (cf. p. 247). The dedicant isa military «architect». At Mons Claudianus under Trajan, another architect, this timea civilian (the Alexandrian Apollônios son of Ammônios), also made a dedicationto Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis, which is the earliest dated attestation of this divine titu-lature (I.Pan 38).


Steatite. Epigraphic field: 20 × 10.5 cm. The rest of the block is irregular and has a maximumdepth of 27 cm. Apart from the two pivot-stone holes, a deep hole (8 × 8 × depth 6 cm) has beendrilled on the face above the inscription and has traces of lime. Is it related to the inscription orwas it drilled in the afterlife of the stone? In the first case, it could be related to the embedding ofa statue. The inscription is neatly carved. The surface has been smoothed and light guide-linesincised. Therefore the letters tend to have the same height (ca. 1.2 cm). Only the last line, whichlooks like an addition, is of a smaller module. The letters were originally rubricated. Some letterswere reshaped in the final stage of the carving (to modify their width or the distance to theneighbouring letters), useless strokes being filled by stucco (initial d, p in Serˇpidi, it in$rxitwktvn, second n in [ntØnio«).

DiÏ ^Hl›8 Megˇl8Serˇpidi M(»rko«) • [ntØnio«Kwler $rxitwktvn

4 xØrth« a Loysitanânãpo›ei.

2 m

«To Zeus Helios Great Serapis, Marcus Antonius Celer, engineer of the First Cohort ofLusitanians, made (this).»

1–2. The hedera serves as spacefiller (to avoid cutting the theonym), not as separator, for thename of Sarapis is not enhanced through the letter size or the layout as in I.Pan 38, 2 orI.Akôris 20, 2.

2. W. Clarysse, Theophoric Personal Names in Graeco-Roman Egypt. The Case of Sarapis,APF 55, 2009, 68–89, has demonstrated that the spelling Serap- instead of the morefrequent Sarap- in the god’s name and in derived anthroponymics is not a matter of date,but is characteristic of a Roman milieu (in Latin, the spelling is normally Serap-). Thatis the reason why, in Egypt, the highest concentration of Serap- is found in the EasternDesert.

3. Military architects are usually mentioned in legions, equites singulares or praetoriancohorts. Two are known in the Misenian Fleet (Stoll 2001). Attestations of architectsbelonging to auxilia are doubtful (ibid. 316 and n. 65; Evans 1994, 146), except, if therestitution is right, a 1st cent. CE votive inscription on an altar found in the sacred bathzone in Aquae, Germania Superior (not mentioned in Stoll 2001): Mineruae / Val(erius)Perimus arc(hitectus) c(o)ho(rtis) et / Vittalis lapp/idari(us) ex uotto / et sui lappidar(ii)(H. Nesselhauf, Fundberichte aus Baden-Württemberg 3, 1977, 328–331, n°1 andfig. 1;12 cf. Lupa 8257). Since equites singulares are selected from the auxilia, it is not sur-prising to find architects belonging to an auxiliary unit.

4. Cohors I Augusta Lusitanorum, which was still part of the garrison of Iudaea in 90 (RMDV 332), is attested in Egypt from 105 on (AE 1968, 513).

12 I thank Dr K. Matijevic for this reference.


3 inv. 658 post 235?SU 13602 21 × 26 × 6.5 cm fig. 12

Fragment of a slab, broken to the right, with a Latin inscription. It is the only possibleevidence for a mention of an emperor in an aedes at Dios. The inscribed area is framedand topped by a roughed out pediment with acroters. Although unfinished, the objectwas on display, since it suffered a rasura. The length of lines is doubtful, because thestate of preservation of the top and of the pediment13 does not allow to decide withconfidence if part of the right side of the pediment is preserved or if the center of thepediment is further to the right, which would imply long lines. On the other hand,I do not see what word(s) could be restituted to the right of imper at l. 1. Unlessthe slab was very wide (Caesar would then belong to a filiation), which is doubtful,Imperator was the only word at line 1. The solution to which one arrives by readingand restoring Se[uer-- at line 3 is a titulature (possibly in the dative) of either Caracallaor Severus Alexander (Imperator Caesar M. Aurelius Seuerus Antoninus/Alexander).Imperator and Caesar have been erased, not Seuerus. Both emperors were submittedto damnatio memoriae, but rasurae are by far more frequent in the case of SeverusAlexander. Normally the erased elements are only Alexander, or M. Aurelius SeuerusAlexander, sometimes the whole sequence from Imperator Caesar on. I have foundonly one instance where Imperator Caesar and Alexander were erased and Seuerus pre-served (CIL VIII 22386, milestone, Numidia).

Steatite. The stone and decoration have been crudely prepared. Guide-lines incised, but thestone-cutter did not use them. The letters (2.5 cm high) were originally rubricated. Two holes(pivot-stone holes?) have been drilled in the left side of the frame. The back, naturally flat andsmooth, is unworked.

^Imper[ator(i?)]\^Caesa[r(i?) ---]\S• e• [uer---]– – –

2 after Caesa[r(i?), M. Aur. should be restituted.

IV. Greek and Latin graffiti from the aedes (4–13)

A few worshippers left a written trace of their visit in the aedes, incised on the soft stea-tite slabs or inlaid plates of the podium. Some of these graffiti can be ascribed totravellers who passed the site after it had been abandoned (13 and the ge’ez graffiti).Earlier worshippers tend to be soldiers (a librarius, two infantry-men, a curator praesi-dii); the only certain non-soldier is a naukleros (12). None of these persons can be

13 I have reexamined the stone in Quft for this purpose. It seems that the right part of thepediment has not been carved out, which gives the (false?) impression that the left raking cor-niche continues to go up.


identified with any other mentioned in the ostraca found at Dios or in the otherpraesidia.

4 inv. 1067 2nd cent.-ca.250SU 152 18.5 × 16 × 3.5 cm fig. 13

Graffito incised with a fine point on a steatite plate of a roughly trapezoidal shape.Face and edges are hewn, the back is rough. Curiously, the text is not horizontallylined up on the top edge, which makes one wonder how the stone was positionedwhen it was written. The two main deities of the aedes are here identified. On this pair,see the general conclusion infra.

DiÏ ^Hl›8 megˇl8Sarˇpidi kaÏ tá«T÷xh« toÜ prai-

4 sid›oy #Io÷li«[xill»«lib(rˇrio«).

1 di= || 2–3 l. tÕ T÷x> || 4 =oyli« || 6 lib/

«To Zeus Helios great Sarapis and to the Fortuna of the fort, Iulius Achillas, clerk.»

2–3. The mistaken grammatical case is perhaps due to the fact that, in the inscriptions, the syn-tagm Ł T÷xh is generally in the genitive (ÉpÍr tá« T÷xh«).

6. For librarii in the desert of Berenice, see O.Krok. 105.

5–7 inv. 1087 2nd cent.SU 152 max. dim. 30 × 23.5 × 5.4 cm fig. 14

NE corner slab on top of the podium. Steatite. The side along which the Latin graffitoruns is rough, the three others are sawn. The edge facing the entrance of the aedescarries a ge’ez graffito. The surface of the slab presents many scratches, among whichonly the Latin graffito and two Greek ones are legible.

5 The brickwork added during one of the refections of the podium covered the last letters.Letters height: 5.5 cm.

CLBRLISMILET

1 It seems that most vowels are missing: C(aius) L!i"b!e"r!a"lis (it is not exceptional in theostraca of the Eastern Desert to have Gˇio« + cognomen)? One can also think of Cl(audius)B!i"r!i"lis, l. Virilis.

2 Read milit(is) (but why the genitive?) or miles?


6 Along the northern edge.

• • e par@ tˆ kyr›8Sarˇpido«

2 l. Sarˇpidi

1. The letters before e look like two p, which is not meaningful. This line is perhaps the con-tinuation of a preceding one, almost completely erased.

7 Along the western edge.

#Isid 1–3

1 The letter after d could be v, in which case it would be the proper name#Is›dvro« and not thegoddess Isis.

8 inv. 1070 2nd cent.-ca. 250SU 152 22 × 26 × 2.5 to 5 cm fig. 15

A roughly trapezoidal steatite plate with protruding top edge. The four sides aresmoothed, the back is roughed out. The author of the Greek graffito has a typical Cop-tite Geb-name (Kronios). His hand is uneducated, and he has crudely representedMin and Isis, Egyptian style, facing each other. For this non-Romanized dedicant, Isiscould be the interpretatio Aegyptiaca of the Roman Isis whose head has been preserved,and who probably is the Tyche of the praesidium as well, Isis being often identifiedwith Tyche in the Hellenistic and Roman periods.14 Letters written in the praesidiumof Raïma in the middle of the second century have proskynemata either to the Tycheof Raïma (O.Claud. II 278) or to «Isis in Raïma» (O.Claud. II 255–257). The statueof Isis standing on the pedestal in the Serapeum of Luqsor dedicated under Hadrianby a former decurio is also an Isis-Tyche, to judge by her cornucopia (Fr. Dunand,BIFAO 81, 1981, 138). Isis is not mentioned in the dedication of the Luqsor Serapeum,but only Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis (SEG 31, 1981, 1548). Was Min, the former patronof the Eastern Desert, officially associated as synnaos theos to Zeus Helios Megas Sara-pis in the aedes of Dios, or is he a free addition due to Kronios’ initiative? Is the thirdlarge statue found in the aedes (cf. fig. 10) a Min?

Krfini« 6Vrv

l. 6Vroy

«Kronios son of Hôros.»

14 See e.g. M. Malaise, Le problème de l’hellénisation d’Isis, in: L. Bricault (ed.), DeMemphis à Rome, Actes du Ier Colloque international sur les études isiaques Poitiers-Futuro-scope, 8–10 avril 1999, 2000, 9.


9–10 inv. 1068 2nd cent.-ca. 250SU 152 30.8 × 12.2 × 2–3.6 cm fig. 16

Two graffiti on a rectangular schist plate which was part of the opus sectile decoratingthe podium. The surface is polished, the sides are sawn, the back is raw. The first graf-fito is incised with a fine point, the second one is deeper. The names are typical for themilitary occupants of the praesidia. The two graffiti are written over a previous oneconsisting of two lines superficially incised and generally illegible. Its first line appearsbetween the two later graffiti and runs: kalÌ« ob • • • • • • .

(m1) Kˇsi« [pollØnio«vac.

(m2) tÌ prosk÷nhmaNwpv« Drˇkvn

4 stratiØth«

«Cassius Apollônios.»«My act of worship. Nepos Drakôn, infantry-man.»

3. If placed after tÌ prosk÷nhma, the name is normally in the genitive. On Egyptian epigraphicproskyn‹mata, see G. Geraci, Ricerche sul Proskynema, Aegyptus 51, 1971, 3–211. I donot know if Drˇkvn is a patronymic or an alias.

11 inv. 1593 2nd cent.-ca. 250cistern 3 16.8 × 8 × 4 cm fig. 17

This fragment of steatite must have belonged to the podium’s masonry. It is one of thefew objects from the aedes found in cistern 3. The graffito has been incised with a finepoint on the smoothed face. The two undersized last letters suggest that it did not con-tinue on another stone.

vac. N›ger koyrˇt(vr)

«Niger, curator.»

12 inv. 1069 post 212SU 152 15 × 28 × 4.2 cm fig. 18

The plate belonged to the opus sectile of the pedestal. Schist. A rather skilled graffitoby an Alexandrian businessman, although he miscalculates the space he needs and isobliged to cram letters at line ends. A play on interlinear space (slightly larger betweenl. 1 and 2, and 3 and 4). The verb was meant to be centered. The hopeful exclamationãp’ $gaùˆ is written in bigger letters. The verb $nwùhke implies that the inscriptionaccompanies a votive gift. Its modesty suggests some cheap offering, perhaps a lampor a statuette. This naukleros is exactly the kind of customer who would consult the or-acle.


A\(r‹lio«) Sarap›vn[lejandreŒ«na÷klhro«

4 $nwùhkaãp’ $gaùˆ.

palma

1

«I, Aurelius Sarapiôn, Alexandrian, ship’s manager, have dedicated (this). Bless me!»

3. Na÷klhro«: a shipping contractor, who can either own or rent one or several boats, beaboard (sometimes as captain) or not.

13 inv. 1065 4–5th cent.SU 152 12 × 5 × 2.5 cm fig. 19

Plate of steatite sawn on each face and side, except for the break (the graffito may havebeen written after the break). Raised edge on the right side. Was the plate perhaps re-shaped from a larger, framed one? Irregular, angular letters, engraved with a fine point.Sigma reminds Latin c, a late palaeographical feature. Both names have a late flavour.They must have been left by visitors who came when the praesidium had been aban-doned and the aedes had begun to sand up.

Sis›nnio«Nestfirio«

1. The Iranian name Sisinnios appears late in Egyptian documents. Two saints of that name wereworshipped in Egypt, the earliest one being a martyr killed in Nicomedia under Diocletian(A. Papaconstantinou, Le culte des saints en Égypte des Byzantins aux Abbassides, 2001,190; D. L. O’Leary, The Saints of Egypt, 1937, 258 sq.). The oldest dated occurrence is thename of the rationalis Flavius Sisinnius (P.Ammon II 30 [348p]). There exist two other graffitimade by a Sisinnios in the Eastern Desert: one in Kompasi (the station after Dios in thedirection of Koptos), one in the Paneion in wadi Minayh (cf. H. Cuvigny – A. Bülow-Jacobsen, Inscriptions rupestres vues et revues dans le désert de Bérénice, BIFAO 99, 1999,151 sq.).

2. The iota is doubtful. If it exists, it has been added afterwards and awkwardly against therho. Perhaps it had even been added first, before the rho, by mistake, which would explain theparasitic stroke which is seen there. Nestfirio« is more probable than a genitive Nwstoro«,the name Nwstvr occurring only once after the Ptolemaic period (SB XVIII 14053, 3/4th

cent., seemingly a school-excercise). Nestfirio« appears in Egypt from the 3/4th cent. on.


V. The ostraca from the filling of the podium

Some 20 ostraca were dumped in the staircase behind the façade of the podium,15 to-gether with an incomplete sundial.16 Among the ostraca, there is a remarkable collec-tion of eight sherds (and one fragmentary tablet made out of steatite), each of themcontaining one or several oracular answers. The other ostraca (fragmentary privateletters, tituli picti, lists of names) are too insignificant and uninformative to be pub-lished here and seem to have nothing to do with religion or rituals, except perhaps forthe following sherd.

14 inv. 1005 2nd cent.-ca. 250US 15302 11.7 × 8.1 cm fig. 20

Probably not a titulus pictus on an AE3 amphora: the sherd has a symmetrical pleasantshape, the text is roughly centered, and tituli picti are normally written along thedirection of the turning. The text is written in a field where the ceramic has beenscratched with a pointed tool, which is rare in ostraca. It happens when the writerwants to make a correction. In the present case, it would have been easier to take an-other potsherd. Did the writer want to smoothen the surface? The writing in line 1 isslightly larger than in line 2.

; ãp’ $gaùˆtˆ oy • • hj›lloy

2 l. -›ll8

It is well known that in Egypt ãp’ $gaùˆ is a wishful acclamation with the same mean-ing as $gaùÕ t÷x> or e\tyxâ« (A. Rehm, Philologus 94, 1940/41, 10). #Ep’ $gaùˆmost often occurs at the end of an inscription, but is sometimes found at the begin-ning. In the latter case, it is normally used absolutely («good luck!»), although it mayoccasionally be applied to the person(s) mentioned in the genitive, e.g. I.Philae II 131:tÌ prosk÷nhma ìde par@ tái 5Isidi ãp’ $gaùâi Kefˇlvno« kaÏ Prvtogwnoy« («forthe good of Kephalôn and Prôtogenês»). In I.Alex.Imp. 101, the name is in the dative,under the influence of e\tyxâ« which often precedes a dative: e\tyxâ« kaÏ ãp’ $gaùˆMˇrkvi A\rhl›vi Mikkalâni.

The identification of the word in line 2 is problematic: what springs to mind iso\hj›lloy, but how to explain the space, corresponding to two letters, between oy and

15 The filling of the staircase is numbered SU 15204 in the stratigraphical record. Some ma-terial labelled 15302 were found in room 53, where they slid from the filling through the littledoor between the chapel and room 53. Thus, they belong to the same stratigraphic unit as ma-terial from SU 15204.

16 This object, made in steatite, therefore on the spot, will be published by AlexanderJones. Apart from numbers, it has a Greek inscription (dystyxân mer›«) which suggests that itmay have been used in the mantic procedure.


hj›lloy? An easy way out would be to regard the faint traces not as letters, but as re-mains of the ink stain which is below line 2, precisely at this level. The writer wouldsimply have avoided the stain.

If we accept the reading o\hj›lloy, another problem arises: does it refer to a stan-dard of the garrison, which was presumably kept in the chapel, or does uexillum haveits metonymic meaning of «detachment», uexillatio? To this day, there exists only asingle other occurrence of uexillum in the ostraca of the Eastern Desert, namely inO.Claud. inv. 7295 (Cuvigny, CdE 77, 2002, 238–248 [189p]), where it means «de-tachment». Usually (in private letters), the group of soldiers composing the garrisonof a praesidium in the Eastern Desert are referred to as tÌ prais›dion, not tÌ o\‹jil-lon. In the first case, the ostracon would be a sort of dedication to the standard of thegarrison («Good luck! To our standard.»), in the second it would be a modest votiveinscription for the benefit of the garrison («Good luck to the garrison!»).17 Whateverthe interpretation, the ostracon is a substitute for an inscription: it is either a verycheap sort of dedication, or a draft of a stone inscription.

15–25. The oracular responses

a. The textsIn their presentation and contents, the oracular answers from Dios show strikingsimilarities with the so-called astragaloi-inscriptions from south-western Asia Minor,the complete corpus of which has recently been published by J. Nollé (2007). Thismasterly publication, where one finds not only the texts of all the astragaloi-inscrip-tions known today, as well as of the related alphabetic oracles, but also a general his-torical and philological study of these documents, replaces previous editions, and inthe following commentaries I shall refer to the texts according to Nollé’s siglae.18

15 inv. 994 ca. 200SU 15204 10.5 × 7.5 cm fig. 21

; b [pfillvno«. Çm(o›v«).p÷la« ¡noige e\l÷toy«te $trapoŒ« öxei«· pore÷-

4 oy tÎn prokeimwnhn Ç-dfin, taxwv« dÍ örgoi«mÎ lfigoi« ge›noy brotoÖ«.

17 The second hypothesis is more probable according to R. Haensch.18 List in Nollé 2007, 295. I shall most often quote ‹K›, which means the archetypus of the

main group of astragaloi-inscriptions as reconstituted by Nollé, and ‹Ant›, the dissentingastragaloi-inscription of Antiocheia on Kragos; for convenience, I shall indicate at the same timethe page of Nollé 2007 where the quoted text can be traced. The following modern studies arealso useful: Naour 1980, Brixhe – Hodot 1988; Graf 2005.


g mÎ xrâ. LhtoÜ«.8 ¡pelùe· loipÌn mhdÍn $`n´te›-

p>« ùeˆ å« ¯ ãpibˇll>· toÜ-to o\x ƒti tv[• •]•[• • •]•[• •]•[[d ]– – – – – – – – – –

1 apollv no«, || 6 l. g›noy || 10 x ex k corr.?

«2. (Oracle) of Apollo. Likewise. Open the doors, easy are for you the paths. Walk theroad which is before you, but in your intercourse with mortals, hasten to use acts, notwords.3. Don’t consult. (Oracle of) Leto. Go, and from now on don’t object to the god con-cerning what you undertake. Not only …[4.] …»

2–3. The metaphors of open doors and a good journey are also associated in the astragaloi-inscription of Antioch on Kragos: $ll’ ÇdÌ« ûd’ $gaùÎ ka› soi p÷lai eåsÏn $noikta› (Ant 8,2 = Nollé 2007, 195). Open doors also in Drexl 1941, 7: $no›gei soi Ç ùeÌ« ù÷ra«. –E\l÷toy« te $trapo÷«: although not exclusively litterary, $trapfi« is not attested in papy-rological documents: it does not seem to have belonged to colloquial or administrativeGreek in Egypt, where only its doublet $trapitfi« is found in five metrical epitaphs, allfrom the necropolis of Edfou and by the same local poet (e.g. I.G.Metr. 35, 1–2: E\agfiroyko÷rhn syngno÷«, jwne, tâi d’ ÉpÌ t÷mb8 / steÖxe sŒn e\tyx›hi tásde di’ $trapitoÜ, «Hear,foreigner, that Euagoras’ daughter is under this tomb and go away happily on this path»).To an Egyptian, $trapfi« must have been felt as Homeric and poetic. E¾lyto« (litterally«easy to untie») referring to a way has no parallel. The idea is that the obstacles are easyto overcome. The theme of the l÷si« (from fear and all kinds of hardships) as a favour ofthe gods is frequent in the astragaloi-ostraca (Nollé 2007, 133 and n. 564).

4–5. Cf. GVI I 1644, 4–5, an epitaph republished with different restorations in Merkelbach –Stauber, SGO I, p. 211 (Hyllarima, Caria, 1st cent. BC): [sŒ dw, Ù] jwno«, t@n $mf ’ ãmoÏgraf@n Çr[ân]/[xa›r]vn $pwrxey t@n prokeimwnan Çd[fin].

5–6. Same themes, with a different meaning in the Alphabeticum paraeneticum by GregoriusNazianzenus, a collection of sententiae similar to the alphabetic oracles from Asia Minor(J. Sakkelion, PatmiakÎ biblioù‹kh, 1890, 18–19): örgoi« d’ $rwskein speÜde kaÏ lfigoi«Ueˆ. Same order to take action quickly in the inscription of Antioch on Kragos: tˇxyne ãp’örgoi« (Ant 27, 3 = Nollé 2007, 198), but without the opposition to lfigoi, which occursin this Menandrean sententia: örgoi« filfipono« úsùi, mÎ lfigoi« mfinon (Monost. 256).Here, the construction of g›nesùai is awkward.

11. Only the extremity of the line above the numeral is extant.


16 inv. 995 ca. 200SU 15204 9.5 × 8 cm fig. 22

Corrections and erasures show that this is a draft (perhaps of oracle n° 4 on thepreceding sherd?). Because of its fragmentary state and the uncertainty of the last line,the message is not fully understood, but it sounds like a xrhsmÌ« ¡prakto«, a deter-ring oracle. It may have something to do with the choice of an ominous deity as itssource.

; d Tyfân[o«¯ ãpix›ri« po •[¯ kat@ cyxÎn •[

4 ^mÎ pfiei\ prˇjai m[Î]prˇ^j>\`j>´« eådø« ƒti o\synf÷rei· Ł g@r ÇdÌ«

katwsthken kaÏ hol vac.8 p•oykei •d •noy • • • • i

2 l. ãpixe›rei« || 6 l. symfwrei || 7 katesth- ex katesta- corr., l. kaùwsthken

2. Poi[ásai] rather than an imperative.3. After cyx‹n, a verb (e.g. ùwlei«) introducing the infinitive prˇjai at line 4? It seems that

the chresmograph tried two ways of expressing the same idea, first with poieÖn, then withprˇssein, which is the normal word in this kind of text (whereas poieÖn is never used).Then, ¯ kat@ cyxÎn -- replaces ¯ ãpix›ri« po-- (which should then have been cancelled).Here kat@ cyx‹n is instead of kat@ noÜn, associated to prˇssein in three oracles of thefive-astragaloi tradition of the Pisidian type (e.g. K 28, 3 = Nollé 2007, 154: prˇjei« p»nkat@ noÜn). The meaning is «to succeed according to one’s wishes/plan».

3–6. Cf. K 3, 2 = Nollé 2007, 127: Än prˇssei« pr»jin, má prˇj>«· o\ g@r ¡meinon, «the actionyou are doing, don’t do, for it is of no avail». ~meinon is typical of the oracular epigraphicalquestions and answers in all the Greek world, particularly in the juncture lâion kaÏ¡meinon (Nollé 2007, 128). It is synonymous with s÷mforon, also found in the astraga-loi-oracles. As far as pagan inscriptions are concerned, the verb symfwrein is found only inthis verse of the alphabetic oracles: Mˇthn ãpe›g>· mÎ tˇxyn’· o\ symfwrei, «In vain do youmake haste. Do not hurry, it is of no avail» (Nollé 2007, 249). But cf. Drexl 1941, 9: sŒdÍ mÎ prˇj>« tÌ pr»gma toÜton, ƒti o\ symfwrei.

7. Katwsthken: an unexpected verb with Çdfi« as a subject. The gˇr implies that it explainswhy to undertake something is useless (o\ symfwrei): «for the road is already set/fixed byfate»? Or the sentence is left unfinished after Çdfi«, as may be suggested by the paragraphos,the larger interlinear space, and a slight change of writing between lines 7 and 8.

8. This line contains too many ambiguous letters: ploy or ptoy (łfilptoy for $wlptoy?);kei or kaÏ? It is unsure whether there is a character or not between ei and d: dyn or den?O\k eÚden or kei!n"d÷noy? Several combinations are paleographically possible at the end.Two far-fetched hypotheses: kaÏ łfilptoy keind÷noy gwmi, «and (the way) is fraught withunexpected danger». Or kaÏ Ł ƒl[h] ploÜ!«" keindyne÷setai, «and the whole voyage willbe endangered».


17 inv. 1012 ca. 200SU 15204 11 × 14 cm fig. 23

This steatite plate had at least two distinct fields (col. I and II) of writing separated bya bead which perhaps formed a frame. The writing surface was whitened, but the writ-ing must have been rubbed and the white is gone except close to the bead. Later thefields were inscribed directly on the stone. Col. I, of which only the last letter(s) of eachline remains, is not published.

The text is too fragmentary for continuous sense, but lines 7–8 seem to give theanswer to a question concerning marriage. The present type of oracles normallyavoids reference to a precise subject, but K 25 is bold enough to predict that theinquirer will come back having married. The only preserved theonym is Kronos, men-tioned in the astragaloi-inscriptions. In Egypt, PGM IV 3083–3111 offers instructionsto obtain a prophecy of Kronos (mant›a Kronik‹). The prayer to say includes: … lwgemoi ãn $nˇgk> perÏ toÜ deÖno« prˇgmato«, «tell me, by necessity, concerning such andsuch an affair». The aim of the prayer is ¬na … eúp>, perÏ ìn ãpervt¹«, «in orderthat … (Kronos) might speak concerning what you ask». We recognize here the vo-cabulary of our responses. On the Berenice road, the mention of Kronos could havesounded as a reference to the Coptite Geb.

col. II – – –m • •[ãmp • •[o $podi[

4 ãpikaleic[lhte ã@n zht[no« labeÖn o\ m[ã@n gameÖn mel[

8 gamei ¡prakto« [do« ãstin.

e Krfinoy [Ç ãn $podhme›< h[

12 vn eå« tÎn åd›an • [ti poieÖ« h • [Ç b›o« s • [– – –

11 l. $podhm›< || 12 =dian

4. #EpikaleÖn («invoke»?) does not belong to the vocabulary of this type of oracles.5. -lhte: a 2nd plural is not to be expected in such responses. An address in the vocative?7–9. Perhaps ã@n gameÖn mwl[l>«, mÎ] gˇmei· ¡prakto« [g@r Ł Ç]dfi« ãstin («If you are on the

point of marrying, do not marry: this road is to no avail.»), although in this type of oracle¡prakto« qualifies only pr»ji«, pr»gma and xrhsmfi«.


11. The inquirer is not directly addressed as usual, but spoken of in the 3rd person. This is alsosometimes the case in the astragaloi-inscriptions, notably in one oracle concerning the$pfidhmo« (K 9, 4 = Nollé 2007, 136: tfin t’ $pfidhmon ãfinta ùeoÏ sØsoysin ã« oúkoy«,«The one who is abroad, the gods will bring him safely home.»).

14. O b›o« soy [is possible.

18 inv. 996 ca. 200SU 15204 8.5 × 7 fig. 24

; h Çm(o›v«). Ñ« ©n 4leieŒ«¡ngistrvn å«byùøn bˇllvn

4 åxù÷a kom›z>ko\k ¡rmata • • [– – – – – –

1 o, l. 4lieŒ« || 2 l. ¡gkistron eå« || 3 l. byùÌn

«8. Likewise. Like a fisherman who throws his hook into the depths of the sea, youbring back a fish and (do not lack?) food …»

1–2. Read by A. Bülow-Jacobsen. Çm(o›v«) had obviously been forgotten and was addedlater.

4. #Ixù÷a: late and poetic acc. singular of åxù2y«. The comparison with the fisherman doesnot occur in this kind of litterature, but cf. Sortes sanctorum 49: In quo speras pisces latent,et tu laetus capies eos (…).Kom›z>: one expects the future. I do not think it is a subjunctive active, 3rd person, depend-ing on Ñ« ¡n.

5. ~rma, late and rare «food» (cf. P. Chantraine, Dictionnaire étymologique de la languegrecque, s.v. 1 $e›rv).

19 inv. 1000 ca. 200SU 15204 8.5 × 7.5 cm fig. 25

ih di’ ƒlh« Łmwra«.òc> ¯ bo÷lei, mÎ deila›-noy· Ç be›o« õjei ãpÏ tÌ

4 ba›ltion. Ł gá ster`e´ˇ. ãpÏtÌ krÖsson östa[i • • • • • • • •]• • $gaùfin[e•[– – –

3 l. b›o« || 4 l. bwltion || 5 l. kreÖsson

«18. During the whole day. You will see what you want. Don’t fear. Your life is headingtowards the better. The earth is firm. All will be better …»

4–5. Cf. P.Vindob.Sal. 1, 4 (infra, p. 274).

;


20 inv. 997 ca. 200SU 15204 8.9 × 10 cm fig. 26

ka Çmo›8«.òc> tÌ syn[3–4]on soy.mÎ e\laboÜ t@ k÷mata

4 tá« ùalˇssh«. mÎ Épo-pte÷s>« tÌn xeimânao\dw soi xalepÌn östai. e¾-xoy toÖ« ùeoÖ« pepoiùØ«,

8 kaÏ a\to› se kybern‹soysinãf ’ ¯ pore÷>. „ deilˇneimÎ tÖe mhdÍ deila›noy.

9 l. deila›nei

«21. Likewise. You will see your …. Do not fear the waves of the sea. Do not appre-hend the storm and it will not be hard for you. Pray to the gods with confidence andthey will guide you where you are going. What you cower before, pay no heed to it, anddo not cower.»

2. Syn[3–4]on is not understood; eyn- is not excluded but does not help, gyn- is not palaeo-graphically acceptable. The letter after yn seems to be e or s. Two meanings are possible:either it means something like «your wishes» (cf. 19), or it refers to what a traveller hopesto go back to (his house, country, family), a theme known in cleromantic inscriptions,although expressed differently.

3–6. Same idea in Sortes sanctorum 36: Licet et ventum cum magno sudore et labore venire, tuncerit tibi in manibus tuis quod petisti; Deum roga, et refer ei gratias.

3. E\labwomai does not belong to the vocabulary of cleromantic inscriptions, but mÎe\laboÜ is a phrase of gnomonologic style, the earliest occurrence, often quoted by latercompilators, being Diphilos’ ùnhtÌ« pefykø« mÎ e\laboÜ teùnhkwnai, «being a mortal bynature, do not fear death».K÷mata is a metaphor employed in oracular inscriptions, but in negative prophecies: prÌ«$nt›a k÷mata moxùeÖ« («you are toiling against hostile waves», K 14, 2 = Nollé 2007, 141);k÷masin mˇxesùai xalepfin («waves are hard to fight», alphabetic oracles).

4–5. ^°popte÷ein does not occur in cleromantic inscriptions, but œpopto« and Époc›a arefound in some alphabetic oracles, cf. Tim and Sol, Y (Nollé 2007, 269): ^°poc›a mÍnöstin, $ll@ mÎ ffiboy, «there are reasons for apprehension, but do not be afraid».

6–9. Cf. K 31, 4 (Nollé 2007, 157): ùeoÖ« pe›ùoy kaÏ ãp’ ãlp›do« úsùi, «obey the gods and hope».Orders to obey the gods are common in cleromantic oracles. The same notion is foundin Homer, when Achilles, choosing to obey Athena’s order, says: ƒ« ke ùeoÖ« ãpipe›ùetai,mˇla t’ öklyon a\toÜ, «whoso obeys the gods, to him do they gladly give ear» (A 218, trad.A. T. Murray, ed. Loeb).

8. Cf. K 10 (Nollé 2007, 136), an oracle of T÷xh kybernØsa, «the steering Fortune».9. Deilˇnei, l. deila›nei. Ind. pres. med. 2nd sg. of deila›nv (derived from deilfi«). The word

is not common in the papyri, nor elsewhere, but is found in P.Tebt. I 58 (W.Chr. 287,111 BC, ded›lantai) and P.Lond. VI 1914 (AD 335, dilanùánai). This verb, whether active,medium or passive, is normally intransitive («to be a coward»), but at line 9 it has an object(´). Unless we have here another verb, deilia›nv (derived from deil›a), «to make afraid».

;


In that case deil!i"a!›"nei, «what makes (you) afraid». Then there would be two differentverbs at lines 9 and 10. But deilia›nv is attested only once, in LXX, Deut. 20.8 (¬na mÎdeiliˇn> tÎn kard›an toÜ $delfoÜ a\toÜ, «so that he does not scare his brother’s heart»).

10. MÎ tÖe: Homeric verb. – MhdÍ deila›noy. No related verb is found in the astragaloi-oracles,but cf. Drexl 1941, 6: perÏ to÷toy mÎ deili¹« mhdÍ taraxùÕ«. tÌn ùeÌn g@r öxei« bohùÌnkaÏ $nac÷xontˇ se, «do not let yourself be scared or troubled about this. God is with you,giving you help and relief.»

21 inv. 1024 ca. 200SU 15204 8 × 7.5 fig. 27

ke Çmo›v«.—sper ãpiùymeÖ gevr-gÌ« ã@n sp›r> tyxeÖn,

4 oœtv« ¯ ãpiùym`e´Ö« kata-lˇboi« xvrÏ« fùfinoy.

3 l. spe›r>

«25. Likewise. Like the farmer wishes to harvest when he sows, so may you obtainwithout hatred what you wish.»

2–5. The nearest parallel is Sortes sanctorum 26: Sicut seminator in terram bonam semen mittit,et fructum in tempore suo restituet, ita ad quod desideras laetus pervenies, et tuam voluntatemfacile invenies.

22 inv. 1015 ca. 200SU 15204 7.5 × 10.5 cm fig. 28

k¨ mÎ xrâ.Ñ« ãpiùymeÖ åta-likÌn plÜon sâsai

4 na÷th«, oœtv« eå«¯ ãpibˇll> Ł Çdfi« soiöstese kal‹.

2 =ta- || 3 l. ploÖon || 6 l. östesai i.e. östai

«26. Do not consult. Like the sailor wishes to save an Italian ship, so, for you, the wayto what you commence will be good.»

2–3. #ItalikÌn ploÖon sâsai: cf. Sortes sanctorum 14: Sicut navis in pelago gubernata fuerit,quod desideras ita tibi veniet (…).

;

;


23 inv. 1027 ca. 200SU 15204 7 × 9 cm fig. 29

; kz proe›a«.ÉpÍr ìn ãrvt¹«ãpite÷j> kaÏ te-

4 leivù‹setai. gh-rˇsei« ãn $gaùoÖ«,kakÌn o\ mÎ eúdoi«.Ł ÇdÌ« kal‹, oÅ ùeoÏ

8 e\e›latoi ösontai.

1 l. prv˝a« || 5 l. $gaùˆ || 6 o\: o ex m corr. l. údoi« || 8 l. e\›latoi

«27. In the morning. You will obtain what you ask and it will be fulfilled. You willgrow old in happiness. May you not see Evil. The road is good. The gods will be mer-ciful.»

b. DiplomaticEach oracle has a heading with two or three elements. Always present are a numberand an indication as to the auspiciousness of time to consult the oracle. There is onlyone papyrological parallel for this type of notations: a table entitled Łmeromant›ai kaÏìrai («days and times suitable for divination») found in the magical miscellany PGMVII (l. 155–167). It gives for each of the 30 days of an undetermined month (of anymonth?) the auspicious moment of the day: õvùen («in the morning»), meshmbr›a«(«at midday»), de›lh« («in the evening»), di’ ƒlh« Łmwra« («all day»); this tripartitionof the day belongs to the pharaonic tradition.19 Some days are entirely inauspiciousand are labelled mÎ xrâ, («do not consult»). In the Dios oracular answers, we find di’ƒlh« Łmwra« and mÎ xrâ, but prv˝a« is used instead of õvùen. However, another tradi-tion, witnessed by several mediaeval manuscripts of the Sortes Astrampsychi,20 has theadverb prv˝. There is no consistency between the table of PGM VII and the one whichbelongs to the instructions for use at the beginning of mediaeval manuscripts of theSortes Astrampsychi. The few agreeing data are incidental.

Four times in Dios oracles one reads Çmo›v« instead of the auspiciousness notation.It means that the latter is the same as in the previous oracle. Therefore, the Diosoracular answers were not tesserae meant to be handed out to the consultant. In spiteof the writing support, they belong to a collection of oracles in which they are classi-fied according to numerals. Since there are three oracles numbered 4 (but one is ob-viously a draft), this collection apparently consists of at least two series. However, oneshould also consider the possibility that even the «neat» ostraca (e.g. 15) are drafts,

19 Cf. M. Malinine, Nouveaux fragments du calendrier égyptien des jours fastes et néfastes,Mélanges Maspero I, 1935–38, 881–899.

20 R. Stewart (ed.), Sortes Astrampsychi II, 2001, 7.


and that the steatite plate 17 is a remnant of the fine copy. What remains of oracle n° 4on plate 17 is certainly different from (aborted) oracle n° 4 on ostracon 16, but it mayhave been the nice copy of the lost oracle n° 4 in ostracon 15.

The extant numbers range between 2 and 27. In four cases (corresponding to thelowest numbers), the name of a god in the genitive is added (Apollo, Leto, Typhôn,Kronos). They are of course the gods who are supposed to give the correspondinganswers. They are unrelated to the deities actually worshipped in the aedes.

The writing in all these documents is experienced. Several scribes were at work.15 has an upright hand, using a bevelled pen (hand 1). 16 may be written in the samehand as 15, but in a less careful style, because it is a draft (hand 2). The steatite plate iswritten in another hand (hand 3: the most diacritic shapes being epsilon and nu). Thelast six oracles (18-23) are in a neat slanted hand (hand 4); they also differ from thepreceding ones by their contents, in that they do not mention a god in their heading.Only in them do we find a comparison (introduced by Ñ« vel sim.). They show twoother characteristics: no sherd contains more than one oracle (it is obvious at leastwith the complete 20–23), and in four cases out of five, the lines of writing runobliquely to the direction of the turning. It is infrequent with ostraca, on which thewriters normally choose to write along that direction or perpendicularly to it. Becausethis scribe is the best attested, we get an impression of his habits: two oracles start withòc>, two with Ñ« ãpiùymeÖ, in two others the verb deila›nein is found, the optative isemployed twice (21, 23).

Hand 4 is paralleled in P.Marm., col. XX, see C. H. Roberts, Greek Literary Hands,1956, 18c; in the last columns, the scribe has a slanted hand with cursive elements.This copy of Favorinus’ PerÏ Fygá« was made between 190/191 and (perhaps) 215;the same passage is in R. Seider, Paläographie der griechischen Papyri II, 1970, n° 30;Seider dates it to the beginning of the 3rd cent. This time span is the same as the onewhich has been determined by archaeology for the oracles.


Dios oracles

c. The epigraphic parallels and the contents of the propheciesThe astragaloi-inscriptions are tables containing, when they were complete (none is),fifty-six oracular answers corresponding to the fifty-six possible numerical combi-nations (sx‹mata) obtained by casting five knucklebones21 (a knucklebone had fourfaces numbered 1, 3, 4, 6: a, g, d, ¨). Such answers obtained by lot22 were called klároi(in Latin sortes). Twenty-one astragaloi-inscriptions are known, all dating to the im-perial period;23 the latest postdate the Constitutio Antoniniana. It is generally ad-mitted that this type of oracle was fashionable in the 2nd century and the beginning ofthe 3rd. The astragaloi-inscriptions are related to another type of cleromantic inscrip-tions, the alphabetic oracles. They are contemporary and occur in the same limitedgeographic area.24 In the alphabetic oracles, the answers consist of one line, arrangedin such a way that the first letters of each line compose an alphabet in acrostics. It issurmised that the inquirers were directed toward a line by drawing lots on which aletter was written, possibly extracting tesserae from a vessel. While the astragaloi-or-acles are in hexameters, the alphabetical oracles are normally in iambic trimeters.However the metre has incurred accidents in the transmission from the archetype tothe local copyists and stone-cutters.

21 There exists two, maybe three inscriptions where seven knucklebones were employed(Nollé 2007, 211–221).

22 Not necessarily using knucklebones: many other methods existed.23 List in Nollé 2007, 20 sq.24 Map in Nollé 2007, 23.

n° hand direction ofthe turning

numeral god auspiciousnessadvice

15 1 ; b [pfillvno« Çm(o›vc)

g LhtoÜ« mÎ xrâ

d [---] [---]

16 2 (= 1 quicker?) ; d T2yfvn[o« --- [---]

17(steatite plate)

3 [d] [---] [---]

e Krfinoy [---]

18 4 ; h Çmo›v«

19 4 ih di’ ƒlh« Łmwra«

20 4 ka Çmo›v«

21 4 ke Çmo›v«

22 4 k¨ mÎ xrâ

23 4 ; kz proe˝a«

;

;

;

;


The astragaloi-oracles were generally inscribed on the four faces of a quadrangularbasis or pillar, probably supporting a statue of Hermes. The quadrangular monumentof the five astragaloi-oracle in Termessos presents at its top traces possibly left by thestatue, a receptacle containing the knucklebones (fimfi«) and the area to throw them.25

Less often, they were on a wall, as the seven-astragaloi oracle from Termessos, wherethe inscribed wall also presents a niche (for the statue?) and various holes around it,presumably testifying to the presence of a fimfi« and a table.26 Although their remainswere not always found in situ, it has been remarked that they were originally in placeswith a lot of traffic.27 The seven-astragaloi oracle at Termessos is inscribed insideone of the gates of the city wall. In other cases, they must have been associated withtemples: the oracles from Antiocheia on Kragos were found in the ruins of a temple.Some of the oracular answers are addressed to a stranger (jwne).

These oracles belong to two textual traditions, one, the better attested, found in andaround Pisidia, the other being represented only by the inscription of Antiocheia onKragos (Cilicia). However, there are similarities between the two traditions and alsobetween each of them and the oracular answers from Dios.

This type of inscription is not restricted to Asia Minor: two very fragmentary listsof five-astragaloi oracles have been found in Thracia.28 The few remains show that theanswers belong to another corpus than the ones from Asia Minor.

The astragaloi-oracles are preceded by a heading containing the cast combination,its sum,29 and the name of the divine power who is supposed to give the oracle,30 e.g.:

aaaad h Moirân«1–1–1–1–4 8 (oracle given by the) Moirai»

In some cases, this heading is followed by a paraphrasis of the combination. Thencomes the oracle itself, in three or four hexameters.

The answers are of three types: (1) go ahead, for the gods are with you; (2) there willbe difficulties (or wait for a better moment) but the outcome will eventually be ac-cording to your plans; (3) (less frequently) give up. They contain an order or an inter-diction, justified by a prophecy formulated in the present or future indicative, on theoutcome of the inquirer’s plans. Sometimes only the prophecy is extant. Sometimes,the inquirer is advised to behave piously with the gods and not to rebel against theirwill (so in 15, 20); it had nothing to do with his actual problem, but the idea that apious behaviour was enough to help things turn out happily must have had a positive

25 Heberdey 1932, 83 and 87.26 Heberdey 1932, 84 and 88.27 Graf 2005, 71–78; Naour 1980, 30 sq.28 See ref. in Naour 1980, 29, n. 29.29 The oracles were arranged by ascending order of the totals (the smallest one necessarily

being 4), which allowed easy finding of the proper answer. At Antiocheia on Kragos, the total isnot in the heading but in the left margin.

30 Absent in TAM III 2, 35 (the seven-astragaloi oracle from Termessos).


effect on his state of mind31 and therefore increased his chances of success. Whereasthe authors of astragaloi-oracles made a point of balancing optimistic and negativeanswers,32 at Dios all the oracles are encouraging, except 16, which is a draft.

People turned to oracular gods when they contemplated an important action withrisky consequences and doubtful outcome, like going on a trip, buying or selling,marrying, etc. In Egypt, according to a long tradition rooted in Pharaonic times andstill vivid in the Christian period, people used to bring to a sanctuary two chits ofpapyrus concerning their personal dilemma, with two opposite answers (the negativeone was often expressed by an uninscribed chit). Both oracular tickets were sealed,to prevent human interference with the choice of the god. How this choice was madeis unknown and must have differed according to local habits.33 This system alloweda precise answer. The astragaloi-oracles are also pre-written, but belong to the classof mante›a called bibliomancy: the inquirer is directed by lot to an answer inside apre-existing textual corpus, which can be a florilegium of Homeric verses (homero-mancy), or biblical quotations, or proverbs … The book of fate known as SortesAstrampsychi belongs to this category, although the intricate, clever procedure forusing it allowed a precise question to be met by a surprisingly precise and appropriateanswer.34 Normally, the answer to a bibliomantic inquiry was purposely vague inorder to apply to any kind of question. When it was a piece of poetry or a proverb, itworked as a metaphor of the particular situation of the inquirer and had to be inter-preted as such. In some cases, an interpreter must have been present to help to orientthe thoughts of the client.35

The astragaloi-oracles have no other literary ambitions than to sound solemnthanks to the metre and a few recherché words. Their themes and vocabulary arevague and lack variation. The same stylistic characters and vocabulary are found inthe oracles of the aedes (where the metre has been dropped). The syntax is simple:conjunctions of subordination are almost absent, sentences are juxtaposed and linkedby ka› or gˇr. The words pr»ji« («doing, action, business») and prˇssein are recur-

31 By eliciting the production of dopamine. This hormon makes one not only more energetic,but also more lucid and helps to take the right decisions. The mere fact that most answers are en-couraging had the same effect. The presence of totally negative answers was only aiming at mak-ing the oracle sound true.

32 Naour 1980, 32.33 A recent bibliographical survey of oracular questions from Egypt is found in P.Oxy. LXXIV

5017–5019, introduction.34 G. M. Browne, The Composition of the Sortes Astrampsychi, BICS 17, 1970, 95–100.35 In Apul. Met. 9. 8, the wandering Syrian priests do not even bother to have a collection of

oracles, but pushing the logic of the system to its extreme consequence, make a lot of money withone all-purpose oracular answer. Whatever the question, the response was: ideo coniuncti terramproscindunt boues / ut in futurum laeta germinent sata. According to the case, the priests ex-plained that the laeta sata, the rich harvests, were the children issued from the contemplatedmarriage, or the money brought by a successful transaction, or a successful business trip or asuccessful expedition against bandits.


rent because they can apply to any project, also alluded to as «what you undertake»(ãpibˇllesùai is also a verb common to both corpora). #EpixeireÖn at Dios (also «toundertake», 16) reminds of ãgxeireÖn usual in the astragaloi-oracles. In both corporathe metaphor of the road is very frequent, not only because it fits any enterprise, butalso because it must have appealed to travellers and foreigners, who were the inquirersin Dios and probably often also in Asia Minor, as we have seen. To the metaphor ofthe road is linked the image of the gods as guides (oÅ ùeo› is the subject of the verbsÇdhgeÖn, Łgemone÷ein, «lead the way» in Asia Minor, of kybern»n, «to steer», at Dios).Proportionally, maritime images are notably more frequent at Dios, for obvious rea-sons, whether the chresmographs chose them in a corpus or created them themselves(the draft 16 suggests a home-made collection): the inquirer is compared with a sailorin 22, with a fisherman in 18, tempest at sea is mentioned in 20. The surprising men-tion of an Italian boat (22) may echo the implication of Italy in the Erythraean tradeand be an attempt to adapt the oracles to local conditions. In the astragaloi-inscrip-tions one finds only one allusion to the sea in the 56 answers of the main group (K 14,related to Poseidon), a few more in the text from Antiocheia on Kragos, the only townin this series that is on the sea. Comparisons introduced by Ñ« are rare in the inscrip-tions (only two), whereas three are found in the small series of Dios, all in the ostracawritten by hand 4. The comparisons found in the astragaloi-oracles are obviouslytaken from fables staging animals, while at Dios the inquirer is compared with variousprofessions: apart from the sailor and the fisherman, also the cultivator (21). Two or-acles of the main group of astragaloi-oracles and one of Antiocheia on Kragos advisethe inquirer not to hurry, as did the bitch who, for that reason, gave birth to blind pup-pies. The same image is found in answer n° 26 of the mediaeval Sortes sanctorum, acollection of oracles numbering to 56, just as the five-astragaloi inscriptions, althoughthis number was arrived at through three six-faced dices.36 This striking similarity

36 The phrase Sortes sanctorum is used by scholars with two meanings: (1) any collection ofChristian oracular responses used in bibliomancy: for instance, the codex edited by A. vanLantschoot, Une collection sahidique de sortes sanctorum (Papyrus Vatican copte 1), Mu-séon 69, 1956, 35–52. This codex contained originally more than two hundred responses.Lantschoot writes, p. 37: «… chez les Grecs et les Romains, on avait recours aux ‹Sorteshomericae›, aux ‹Sortes virgilianae›; on ouvrait au hasard un des livres de ces deux poètes et,d’après que le passage qui s’offrait au regard présentait un pronostic favorable ou défavorable,on réglait sa façon d’agir. L’usage se répandit aussi chez les chrétiens et on vit naître ainsi des‹Sortes biblicae›, des ‹Sortes apostolorum›, des ‹Sortes sanctorum›. C’est cette dernière appel-lation qui est généralement employée pour désigner ce mode de divination» (underlined by me);(2) a specific collection of 56 Christian oracular responses, the Latin text of which is reproducede.g. in C. Chabaneau, Les sorts des apôtres, texte provençal du XIIIe siècle, Revue des languesromanes 18, 1880, 172–178, or in J. Rendel Harris, The Annotators of the Codex Bezae(with some notes on Sortes sanctorum), 1901, 117–127 (non vidi). In the Middle Ages Sortessanctorum was used in meaning (2) only, as is well shown in W. E. Klingshirn, Definingthe Sortes Sanctorum: Gibbon, Du Cange, and Early Christian Lot Divination, JECS 10:1, 2002,77–130.


suggests that the astragaloi-inscriptions and the Sortes sanctorum derive from a com-mon subliterary tradition.37 By their style and cautious vagueness, the answers of theSortes sanctorum are clearly related to the inscriptions: promises to obtain what onewishes, orders to proceed hastily, or, on the contrary, to abstain from action, meta-phors of the road, assurances that God is helping the inquirer. Of course, the Christiangod has replaced the pagan deities, but Christian objectors to the use of Sortes sancto-rum were perfectly aware that it was a Christian disguise of a pagan practice.38 Sortessanctorum exist in Coptic; fragments of a Coptic version have been found in thechurch of St. Kollouthos in Antinoopolis where oracular dual-tickets requests of thewell known Egyptian type have been found too. Several types of popular divinationwere practiced in this holy place.39

Other Christian oracular systems are kin to the Sortes sanctorum and resort to thesame vagueness; there again, the vocabulary can be traced back to the 2nd–3rd centurypagan oracles. I have several times invoked parallels found in one of the versions of abook of fate entitled ®iktolfigion ãk tân toÜ 4g›oy e\aggel›oy kefala›vn: it consistsof 38 entries, numbered from a to lh, each of which containing a kefˇlaion, i.e. aquotation supposedly excerpted from the Gospel of John, followed by an interpre-tation introduced by the word Yrmhne›a.40 The inquirer would somehow draw one ofthe 38 numbers to know what fate had in store for him.

As already remarked, the four gods mentioned in the headings of four oracles fromDios have nothing to do with the gods worshipped in the aedes, nor are they related tothe contents of the oracles, where, when divinity is mentioned, it is always under thegeneral oÅ ùeo›. The astragaloi-oracles show that these discrepancies should not botherus. A few of them have kept a general heading, which was variously formulated andplaced the collection of oracles under the authority either of Apollo or Hermes, orboth.41 It did not prevent each oracle from being said to emanate from other deities

37 Graf 2005, 79–82. One must be aware that Sortes sanctorum (sometimes called Sortesapostolorum) and Sortes Astrampsychi are two different oracular systems (confusion about theme.g. in Frankfurter 1998, 195): Sortes sanctorum provide vague answers to any question, whileSortes Astrampsychi and their christianized avatars (such as Sortes XII Patriarcharum) provide,through an intricate system of number correspondances and decades of answers, a preciseresponse to a predefined precise question: T. C. Skeat, An Early Mediaeval «Book of Fate»: TheSortes XII Patriarcharum, Mediaeval and Renaissance Studies 3, 1954, 54.

38 P. W. van der Horst, Sortes: Sacred Books as Instant Oracles, in: L. V. Rutgers et al.(ed.), The Use of Sacred Books in the Ancient World, 1998, 158. By contrast, divination by aper-tio libri using the Bible was considered more acceptable.

39 L. Papini, Fragments of the Sortes Sanctorum from the Shrine of St. Colluthus, in:D. Frankfurter (ed.), Pilgrimage and Holy Space in Late Antique Egypt, 1998, 393–401.

40 Drexl 1941. On this subtype of oracular books, see P. Canart – R. Pintaudi, PSI XVIICongr. 5: un système d’oracles chrétiens (Sortes sanctorum), ZPE 57, 1989, 85–90.

41 At Tyraion, the heading is: XrhsmoÏ [pfillvno« Pyù›oy ãn pent’ $stragˇloi« å« tÌnErmán (Naour 1980, n° 5, 1–2; Nollé 2007, 51), «Five-knucklebones-oracles of Pythian

Apollo (given) to Hermes».


named in its particular heading. Among the gods named in the Dios oracles, Apolloand Kronos appear in the headings of astragaloi-oracles, but not Leto and Typhôn.However Leto is the first named in P.Leid.Inst. 8, a concordance table for the Sortes As-trampsychi (see below). The editors suggest that it could be a reminiscence of Herodo-tos, according to whom the most important Egyptian oracular shrine was that of Letoin Bouto.

These deities must have been felt as more decorative than effective in the process,since they are omitted in some astragaloi-inscriptions.42 Hand 4 at Dios leaves themout, and theonyms tend to be replaced by allegorical abstractions at Antiocheia onKragos, where oracles are put under the authority of [nˇgkh (Necessity), #Epox‹(Pause), Katox‹ (Delay), Kairfi« (Opportunity), Pfino« (Hard Work), B›o« (Life), etc.At Antiocheia, the words sum up the main theme of the answer. This unsystematiclinking of a deity to an answer also reminds of the Sortes Astrampsychi: in the medi-aeval witnesses, the decades of answers are often under a patronage (in that case ofBiblical characters). This also occurs in two papyri, P.Berol.inv. 2134143 and thealready mentioned P.Leid.Inst. 8 (both 3rd cent. CE). The latter is a table of correspon-dence giving for each question number, not only the decade number, but the name ofthe deity to which this decade is related. It is interesting to note that, as in the inscrip-tion of Antiocheia on Kragos, the two deities whose names are preserved in the Berlinpapyrus and some of the ones in the Leiden papyrus are abstractions: [merimn›a(Freedom from Care), 6°pno« (Sleep), E¾noia (Goodwill), Prosdok›a (Hope),#Vfel›a (Help), Pfiro« (Means). Gods and abstractions are called in the Leiden papy-rus ùeoÏ xrhmatistaÏ kaÏ shmˇntore«, a phrase in which the two last words have anunusual meaning («gods who give oracles and signs»).

d. An unsolved problem: the mechanism of inquiry at DiosHow the astragaloi-oracles worked is all the easier to understand as the procedure isprecisely described by Pausanias in his description of a cave consecrated to Herakles atBura in Achaïa (7. 25. 10): … ^Hraklá« o\ mwga« ãstÏn ãn sphla›8 (…) e¾xetai mÍng@r prÌ toÜ $gˇlmato« Ç tˆ ùeˆ xrØmeno«, ãpÏ dÍ tÕ e\xÕ labøn $stragˇloy« – oÅdÍ ¡fùonoi par@ tˆ ^HrakleÖ keÖntai – twssara« $f›hsin ãpÏ tá« trapwzh«· ãpÏ dÍpantÏ $stragˇlvn sx‹mati gegrammwna ãn p›naki ãp›thde« ãj‹ghsin öxei toÜsx‹mato«, «there is a smallish Herakles in a cave. The person who consults the godmakes a prayer before the statue, and, after praying, he picks up four knucklebones(plenty of them lie beside the Herakles) and throws them on the table. For each com-

42 Nollé regards them as later additions, not belonging to the tradition (2007, 110). Ibid.108–109 for a discussion of the respective roles of Apollo, Hermes and the gods attached to eachoracle.

43 W. Brashear, New Magical and Divinatory Texts in Berlin, in: M. Meyer – P. Mirecki(ed.), Ancient Magic and Ritual Power, 1995, 221–229.


bination of the knucklebones, the board conveniently provides a written interpre-tation.»44

Despite the formal similarities in the headings, the numerals in the Dios oraclescannot represent a cast of dice or astragaloi, since the range of numbers preserved isbetween 2 and 26. A set of astragaloi or dice could not produce amounts that different.The inquirer would rather have drawn numbers on papyrus chits or on ostraca (con-tained in the mysterious receptacle of the podium?), or be asked to choose at randoma number between 1 and, say, 30. However, the notations on auspiciousness stronglysuggest that the numbers refer to the 30 days of a month. In that case, the choice of theoracle may simply have depended on the day of the consultation.45 If there were in-deed several series of oracles (at least two, as we have seen), the reason for it could thenbe that the collection aimed either at covering several months, or at allowing severalpersons to consult on the same day without obtaining the same answer, which wouldhave made a bad impression.46 It is however difficult to fit the auspiciousness no-tations in this hypothesis. Above all, there is also a contradiction between the fact thatan oracular answer exists and the instruction «don’t consult» which goes with it. Ordid the heading have a double function? According to its use, the numerals would al-ternatively refer to the day of the month (then one knew that one should not consulton the 2nd or the 26th) or to the number of the oracle obtained by lot. Instead of con-sulting a table of Łmeromant›ai kaÏ ìrai, the user of the book would search in the col-lection the number of the day. Of course, another possible explanation is that theauthors of this collection did not understand perfectly what they were doing. Suchmistakes are not infrequent in Sortes-books. We know that some users of the Sortes As-trampsychi had at their disposal a faulty copy. This edition, the so-called first ökdosi«,was compiled by someone who had attempted to reconstruct the book without thehelp of the concordance table which gave the order of the decades of answers beforethey were shuffled, and the anonymous copyist was not aware that some of theanswers were fictitious and corresponded to no question. The result was an edition ofthe Sortes which could not work properly.47

e. Papyrological parallelsIf oracular inquiries are well attested in Greek papyrology (taking the form of the well-known dual request-tickets), oracular answers (apart from the Sortes Astrampsychi)are a rarity. Up to now, only four such documents existed, all of unknown provenance.

44 Nollé 2007, 15.45 It would mean that what Fate had in store for the inquirer would have been different if he

had consulted it on another day. But the inquirer would not know that.46 Cf. Eus. PE 5. 21. 1–6: the philosopher Oinomaos is indignant to hear that the oracular re-

sponse which he has received at Claros had already been given to someone else.47 R. Stewart, Another Look at P.Iand. 5.71 and P.Rain. 1.33, ZPE 69, 1987, 237 sq. In

P.Leid.Inst. 8, the concordance of numbers of questions and decades meant to use the Sortes As-trampsychi was faulty.


I quote the texts for convenience. In the first three, one recognizes the vocabulary typi-cal of the astragaloi-inscriptions, a parallel which has escaped the editors. Those fourtexts are independant documents, obviously meant to be kept by the inquirer. Theyare written across the fibers, in two cases on narrow strips of papyrus, which suggestsa similarity in the oracular procedure. Except for the last one (the identificationof which as an oracular answer is not absolutely certain), the writing is experienced,in P.Vindob.Sal. 1 even aesthetic. The contents are vague, but comforting. In twocases, the oracle is presented as emanating from a god (Zeus, Demeter), whose namecomes first. Although there is an attempt at versification, the vocabulary is simpleand standardized, as well as the themes: fulfilment of wishes, travel associated withsuccess.

– P.Vindob.Sal. 1 (1st–2nd cent. CE). Strong influence of chancery hand. 8.5 × 4 cm.

ÉpÍr ìn łj›vsa«· Égia›nei«.¯ ãnùymeÖ« di@ nyktÌ« kaÏ Łmwra«öste so›· eå« ¯ ùwlei« oÅ ùeo› se Çdag‹soy-

4 sin kaÏ Ç b›o« soy ãpÏ tÌ bwltion östekaÏ e\sxhmfinv« tÌ zán õjei«.

3–4 l. östai

«Concerning your inquiry: you are in good health. What you long for night and daywill be yours. The gods will lead you to what you want, your life will improve and youwill have an honorable life.»

Several astragaloi-oracles from Asia Minor associate, as here, good news about healthand success (e.g. PerTI 8, 3–4 = Nollé 2007, 97). The beginning of line 1 remindsof the phrases perÏ ìn m’ ãpervt¹« or ƒs’ ãpervt¹« which are recurrent in astragaloi-inscriptions.

– P.Aberd. 14 (3rd cent. CE?). 7.7 × 1.4 cm. Iambic trimeters.[Z]e÷« soi d›dvsi pr»jin e\tyxestwran • •[pore÷oy pr»sse kaÏ ãpit÷gxane.

«Zeus gives you a most successful action. Go, do, succeed.»

1. Cf. K 1, 3–4 = Nollé 2007, 123: ZeŒ« $gaùÎn boylÎn saÖsi fres›n, Ù jwne, dØsei· dØsei d’e\fros÷nhn örgoi«, $nù’ ìn sŒ xar‹s>, «Zeus will put good advice in your mind, foreigner,and he will give mirth to your affairs, of which you will rejoice.»

– P.Yale II 131 (3rd cent. according to the ed., but to me 2nd cent. looks possible as well).12.5 × 1.7 cm. Iambic trimeters.

D‹mhtro« 4gná« toÜton eúlhfa« f›lontÌn tá« $lhùe›a« soy xrhsmfin· ãgmaùøn ƒpoyti prˇssei«, œpage kaÏ ãpitygxˇnei«.


«You have received this propitious oracle of truth from Holy Demeter: When youhave learned where you are going,48 go and you reach your goal» (transl. Susan Ste-phens).

2–3. Cf. K 11, 2 = Nollé 2007, 138 (stwlle, ƒpoy xrïzei«) and K 48, 2 = Nollé 2007, 172(stwlle, ƒpoy soi ùymfi« !¡nvge").

– P.Berol.inv. 13232 (K. Treu, Archiv 24/25, 1976, 120) (Byz.). Published as a Chris-tian oracular answer but, in spite of its shortness, it gives a different ring from theSortes sanctorum oracular type. Lucia Papini suggests that it could be an amulet.49

Written in a slightly inexperienced but clear hand on reused material (the editor re-marks on two lines of documentary writing on the other side). 3.5 × 5.5 cm.

+ mÎ blˇc>« tÎncyx‹n soy· ãk ù(eo)Üg@r tÌ genˇmenon.

«Don’t harm your soul, for what happened comes from God.»

f. ConclusionThe oracles from Dios are the membra disiecta of an informal oracular book belongingto a tradition, not especially Egyptian, which seems to start in the 2nd century CE. Inantiquity, this tradition is represented by the astragaloi-inscriptions from south-westAsia Minor, by three scraps of papyrus and by collections of Christian oracles of theSortes sanctorum type. Our ostraca are, with the fragments of Sortes sanctorum foundin the church of St. Kollouthos at Antinooupolis, the only remnants of an oracularbook found in a shrine:50 such oracular manuals are supposed to be meant for use out-side a sanctuary.51 However, this scarcity may be due to our ignorance of archaeologicalcontexts.

Other details in their presentation borrow from different oracular systems: the at-tribution of each oracle to a different deity is attested in astragaloi-inscriptions as wellas in some versions of the Sortes Astrampsychi (where, to be accurate, the god presidesover a set of answers) and their Christian adaptation, the Sortes XII Patriarchum. The

48 I would rather translate ƒpoy ti prˇssei« «where your action takes place».49 L. Papini, Struttura e prassi delle domande oraculare, APapyrol 2, 1990, 14.50 The other parallel that might come to mind is not pertinent: the «archive of Hor» are 2nd

cent. BC ostraca with oracular contents found in a chapel of Thoth at Saqqara (W. B. Emery,JEA 52, 1966, 3–5). But instead of being meant for inquirers, as in Dios, they are reports, writtenand dictated by the priest Hor, about messages sent to him through dreams by Thoth, and sup-posed by him to be of interest to the king. These texts which have an autobiographical touch andseem «to have been the waste-paper basket of a troubled man, notes discarded after their com-mission to papyrus» (J. D. Ray, The Archive of Hor, XIV), are of a completely different nature.

51 Frankfurter 1998, 181: «The very notion of oracle rite has therefore clearly shifted into aself-conscious textuality; and it would seem that one of the major functions of this textuality isits independence from the temple structure, its mobility, efficiency, and general practicality(even if restricted to a limited and literate number of specialists).»


same applies to the use of a monthly table of auspicious and unauspicious moments toconsult an oracle, which probably derives from the extensive pharaonic calendars in-dicating, for the three divisions of each day, its degree of (un)auspiciousness (for anydaylight occupation, not only divination). Such tables of Łmeromant›ai kaÏ ìrai couldbe applied to any kind of divinitation: we know that this was the case with the SortesAstrampsychi.

The Dios collection gives an impression of a rush job. The team of chresmographsdid not even have papyrus at their disposal and had to resort to local materials, ostracaand steatite.52 They seem to have composed the oracles themselves, following familiarlexical patterns, hence the draft 16 and the awkwardness of some of the texts. Howthese amateur practitioners, whether they were soldiers or civilians, gained from themilitary authorities the right to exercise their art in the aedes of the praesidium, re-mains a matter of speculation, as well as the mode of consultation: we do not knowwhich chance tool was employed to select an answer, nor how this answer was com-municated to the inquirer. Probably the latter had to make a prayer beforehand, as wasthe case in Bura and as is prescribed in the instructions for use of mediaeval oracularbooks. It is tempting to imagine that the diviner read the oracles from behind thestatues. The space inside the podium is too small for a man to sit on the stairs withouthis head showing, but there were perhaps curtains hiding it, unless he spoke from thenext room through the small door which leads to the stairs.

How did the oracles arrive in the filling inside the podium? They must have beenfound lying in the chapel when it was decided to refit it (phase 7). The whole collectionwas originally more numerous. Had it been taken away by the diviner, who wouldthen have forgotten part of it? It is striking that a simple draft was originally housed inthe shrine. The reason for this may be that such a note, found by anybody, would re-veal the all too human origin of the oracles.

VI. General conclusion: once more Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis

The shrine discovered in Dios was built on the ruins of previous rooms. The originalaedes, of which any architectural trace has vanished, was presumably in the rear part ofthe fort, as is suggested by parallels and by the discovery of two reused inscriptions inthis zone (2 and 3). The new aedes is surely posterior to 160, maybe to Caracalla (217)or Severus Alexander (235). In the latter case, its transformations (phases 4, 5, 7)would have taken place in quick succession, since Dios, as Didymoi, seems to havebeen abandoned around 250.53 At Didymoi, the excavated aedes is also secondary andmay have been built in 176/177, when the whole praesidium was reorganized after thecollapse of its well (I.Did. 3). Up to now, Dios and Didymoi are the only praesidia

52 Papyrus was a rather rare commodity in the praesidia (Cuvigny et al. 2003, 265–267).53 The argument a silentio from the texts is corroborated by the typology of the latest ceramic

and glassware.


where the excavation of the shrine has had significant results, inasmuch as it yieldedinscriptions and objects. The Dios aedes is the better preserved, because it was heavilysanded up already in antiquity.

This chapel is not what we expect of a camp aedes, but Dios was not a military campstricto sensu: the society inside the praesidia of the Eastern Desert was a mixed one,with soldiers and civilians living there or stopping for a halt. In a proper militaryaedes, one expects a cult of standards (signa), dii militares, and emperors. Ostracon 14,if o\hj›lloy is the right reading, contains a weak indication that the Dios aedes alsoserved to keep a vexillum, the display of which is perhaps witnessed by the cavityframed by wooden pegs on the podium. As to the imperial cult, there is no evidencefor it at Dios, except perhaps inscription 3, which may come from the first aedes. Thatan imperial cult was practiced in the chapels of the praesidia is otherwise shown by thename given to the aedes of Aphrodites in a letter found in Didymoi: the author asks hiscorrespondant to send him palms to decorate t@ prink›pia tân kyr›vn (O.Did. 31,thrown away and therefore presumably written between 176 and 220).

In Dios, the dominant cult is that of Sarapis, more precisely Zeus Helios Megas Sa-rapis, as he is styled in 4. The first aedes was already devoted to that god (cf. 2). In thesecond aedes, his cult is represented by the remnants of a large statue of the enthronedtype, graffiti 4 and 6, and a crude small stela representing a radiated (thus solar) Sara-pis, sitting enthroned, holding a scepter or spear in the left hand and having Cerbe-rus54 on his right side. A large clay head of a stylised carnivore found in the sand fillingthe chapel surely belongs to a Cerberus which probably sat on the podium beside itsmaster. The group may have inspired the small stela, which is a votive offering madeon the spot in steatite.

The religious material found in Dios confirms once more the omnipresence of ZeusHelios Megas Sarapis in the Roman settlements in the Eastern Desert from Trajan on.Previous sanctuaries, such as the one in the metalla of wâdî Samna or wâdî Hamma-mât were dedicated to Pan-Min, who had reigned over the Eastern Desert since phara-onic times.55 The earliest dated evidence for Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis in the RomanEmpire is the dedication made by an Alexandrian architect in the reign of Trajan onan altar found at Mons Claudianus (I.Pan 38). In 118, the imperial slave Epaphroditosconsecrated a temple to Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis at Mons Claudianus (I.Pan 42); theSerapeum which he built at Mons Porphyrites probably dates to the same year(I.Pan 21). The place of origin of this syncretic, late god is debated. Recently, L. Bri-cault has defended the view that he was created in Thebes as an interpretatio Graecaof Amun-Ra. His argument is that the earliest witnesses of the epiclese Zeus HeliosMegas Sarapis are situated in Upper Egypt, not only in the Eastern Desert, but also inThebes and Ombos. Since then, G. Tallet has argued in favour of the opinion thatZeus Helios Megas Sarapis was «invented» in Alexandria. She explains his expansion

54 Very schematic: I owe the identification to Gaëlle Tallet (per litt.).55 Cuvigny 1997.


in Upper Egypt with the penetration by the Roman army.56 Without entering a dis-cussion which goes beyond the subject of this paper, I would like to add three argu-ments to G. Tallet’s thesis:

(1) There was no direct road between Diospolis (Thebes) and the praesidia of theEastern Desert. So why a Theban god?

(2) The epithet mwga« in the god’s titulature is an argument for the genealogy MegasSarapis (a phrase attested for the first time in 20/21 in Alexandria, I.Alex.Imp. 46)M Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis. This epithet is doubly paradoxical: in other divine titu-latures, it usually applies to ùefi«, not to the theonym itself; although banal, it soundslike a requirement, as if its presence were essential to the definition of that god.

(3) In my opinion, CIL III 3 (ILS 4395, Creta, 102–114p) can be considered as anotherearly, Trajanic attestation of Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis, yet in the shape of an inter-pretatio Latina.57 The atmosphere is clearly Alexandrian. Moreover, the successive edi-tors and commentators of this inscription have failed to notice another possible link toAlexandria: the owner of the boat mentioned in this dedication made by an imperialfreedman is called Tiberius Claudius Theôn, and is therefore an homonym of TiberiusClaudius Theôn, known as misùvtÎ« tá« Loyke›oy [nna›oy Senwka o\s›a« (P.Oxy.XXXVIII 2873, 62p); he was still conductor of this estate, which by then belonged to theemperor, in P.Oxy. XLII 3051 (89p), where he is styled former gymnasiarch and former$goranfimo« of Alexandria. We also know through P.Oxy. II 290 that this versatilebusinessman also owned land in the Oxyrhynchite.58 The social and economic linksbetween Alexandria and Oxyrhynchos are well known. In spite of the dates59 and ofthe banality of the names, I am tempted to believe that these two Alexandrian tycoonsare one and the same, or at least that the ship-owner is the son of the conductor.

The success of Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis in the semi-military Roman settlements(metalla, road stations) is understandable, since he suited the expectations of all socialcategories living there: he was sufficiently Egyptian for the indigenous work-force;60

he was a Greek and (probably) Alexandrian god for the managerial staff (imperial

56 Zeus Hélios Megas Sarapis, un dieu égyptien ‹pour les Romains›?, in: N. Belayche –J.-D. Dubois (ed.), Dévots des dieux et fidèles d’un dieu: parcours de cohabitations religieusesdans les mondes grecs et romains, forthcoming. I am grateful to G. Tallet for sending me hermanuscript.

57 Ioui Soli optimo maximo / Sarapidi et omnibus diis et / imperatori Caesari Neruae TraianoAug. Germanico Dacico n. / Epictetus libertus tabellarius / curam agente operis Dionysio Sostra/tifilio Alexandrino, gubernatore / nauis parasemo Isopharia T. Cl. Theonis.

58 On the papyrological dossier of this man, see J. Rowlandson, Landowners and Tenantsin Roman Egypt, 1996, 58 et n. 100.

59 The span is even larger if we take into account C.Pap.Gr. II 8 (55/56p), where only the prae-nomen of the conductor of Seneca’s estate is preserved.

60 Bricault (2005, 250) observes however that dedications to Zeus Helios Megas Sarapisnever emanate from Egyptians (in the cultural sense of the word). As a matter of fact, the onlydedication in the Dios aedes made by someone who sounds of popular, civilian, vernacular ori-gin (8) is to Min and Isis.


slaves and freedmen, soldiers), who usually spoke Greek and, for some of them, be-longed to the Alexandrian elite, whose upper crust was enroled in the select club of thenaokfiroi of Megas Sarapis. One of the first known naokfiroi of Megas Sarapis is Sul-picius Serenus, prefect of the Mons Berenices under Hadrian.61 Finally, for the fewWestern Romans, Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis could implicitly be identified with Iup-piter Optimus Maximus as CIL III 3 shows.

At Dios, the common identification of the eponymous Zeus/Jupiter with Sarapismakes the choice of this god as the main deity of the aedes quite natural. More surpris-ing is his possible position as the main god at Didymoi, where one would rather expectto have a cult of the Dioscuri, since they are the patron deities of that praesidium(not only are they eponymous, but they are also invoked in the proskyn‹mata found inletters written at Didymoi). Nevertheless, the Didymoi aedes strongly recalls a Sera-peum, not a shrine of the Dioscuri. This impression is given by small votive offerings,like statuettes and terracotta figurines of Isis and Sarapis, Egyptian-style objects such asa sphinx and two offering tables.62 Only one dedication to a god has been preserved,I.Did. 4, unfortunately incomplete: of the god’s designation only the epithet megˇl8 ispreserved, a singular which excludes the Dioscuri, but which would suit Zeus HeliosMegas Sarapis. Two versions of the same inscription, thanking Sarapis for a dream,were also originally displayed in the Didymoi aedes.63 As for the Dioscuri, there is noepigraphic or iconographic trace of their cult in the aedes, except perhaps for a votiveschist plate representing an armoured cavalryman holding his horse by the bridle. Wereall the aedes of the praesidia in the desert of Berenice dedicated to Zeus Helios Megas Sa-rapis? We need to discover another aedes with material to verify this hypothesis.

It is interesting to examine how the cult of Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis is articulatedwith other cults in the Roman desert settlements. At Dios, according to graffito 4, hiss÷nnao« ùefi« is the Tyche of the praesidium, an interpretatio Graeca of the Geniuspraesidii. Military Genii are often paired with one of the dii militares (Jupiter, Minerva,Mars, Hercules).64 One observes that, when a site in the Eastern Desert is named after agod, this god is also invoked in the epistolary proskyn‹mata. When the toponym isnot a theonym, the god invoked by letter writers in their prosk÷nhma is either the ge-nius loci (Mons Claudianus and its satellites),65 or, in the desert of Berenice, another god.

61 Sulpicius Serenus is the first precisely dated naokfiro« of Megas Sarapis. The TiberiusClaudius […] in SB V 8010 could precede him, but the suggested date (Nero’s reign) is not cer-tain (cf. P. van Minnen, ZPE 93, 1992, 198, n. 15).

62 J.-P. Brun – M. Reddé, Chapter I: «Le fort», in: Cuvigny et al. (forthcoming).63 Cuvigny, Un soldat de la cohors I Lusitanorum à Didymoi: du nouveau sur l’inscription

I.Kanais 59bis, BIFAO 101, 2001, 153–157.64 M. P. Speidel – A. Dimitrova-Milceva, The Cult of the Genii in the Roman Army and

a New Military Deity, ANRW II.16.2, 1978, 1542–1555, at p. 1553.65 A. Bülow-Jacobsen, Proskynemata in the Letters and Evidence of Tyche/Isis, etc. in the

Eastern Desert, in: O.Claud. II, p. 65–68. Letters sent to Mons Claudianus from neighbouringpraesidia contain proskyn‹mata to the T÷xh praisid›oy / Ra3ima / Kampáto«.


In the Eastern Desert, the association of Sarapis and the genius loci otherwise occurs inthe auspicious introductory formula of letters collectively written by the quarrycraftsmen to the prefect Antonius Flavianus and to the procurator metallorum in thelate second century (the Tyche of the addressee is flatteringly associated to the twoother deities): e.g. toÜ kyr›oy Serˇpid(o«) ùel‹santo« kaÏ tá« T÷x(h«) toÜ Klaydia-noÜ kaÏ tá« [s]á« T÷xh« synepisxy[sˇ]sh« (O.Claud. IV 857, 4–8). Judging fromRonchi, Lexicon, s.v., T÷xh as interpretatio Graeca of a genius loci is not attested in pa-pyri before the middle of the second century. The same is observed in the O.Claud.

Since Tyche is often identified with Isis (cf. 8, introd.), it is not unsafe to surmisethat a large female head found in the sand-filling, presenting the typical «Libyancurls» of the Hellenistic-Roman Isis, belongs to the standing statue found on the po-dium, where there were originally the group of sitting Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis withCerberus and a standing Tyche. Contrary to simple Sarapis, who is normally wor-shipped as part of the pair which he forms with Isis (who then often has precedenceover him), Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis is a dominant male, quite independant from Isis(when mentioned, his consorts are often anonymously designated as s÷nnaoi ùeo›).

People often needed to consult gods to make an important decision or know whatFate had in store for them. It is understandable that the omnipresent (Zeus HeliosMegas) Sarapis would provide this service also in the Eastern Desert, where he hadovershadowed the other gods. We have already mentioned the dream sent by Sarapisto a soldier at Didymoi; at Mons Claudianus, a quarry is called Chresmosarapis (Sa-rapis’oracle).66 In Dios, a team of xrhsmolfigoi was allowed to officiate in a chapel ofZeus Helios Megas Sarapis, using a textual tradition better witnessed outside Egyptand especially designed for travellers.

CNRSInstitut de PapyrologieUniversité de Paris IV Sorbonne1 rue Victor CousinF-75005 Paris

66 O.Claud. IV 657, 658, 811.

Dios Didymoi Maximianon Persou Aphrodites Xeron MonsClaudianus

MonsPorphyrites

chief god ofthe sanctuary

Zeus HeliosMegasSarapis

? ? ? ? ? Zeus HeliosMegas Sarapis

Zeus HeliosMegas Sarapis

eponymous Zeus Dioscuri Ø Ø Aphrodite Ø Ø Øepist.prosk. Zeus Dioscuri Sarapis Athena Aphrodite Athena Tyche of the

ClaudianusTyche of thePorphyrites

genius loci Tyche of thepraesidium

Tyche of theClaudianus

Tyche of thePorphyrites


Bibliographic abbreviations

Bagnall et al. 2001 = R. S. Bagnall – A. Bülow-Jacobsen – H. Cuvigny, Security andWater on Egypt’s Desert Roads: New Light on the Prefect Iulius Ursus and Praesidia-buildingunder Vespasian, JRA 14, 325–333.

Bricault 2005 = L. Bricault, Zeus Hélios Mégas Sarapis, in: C. Cannuyer (ed.), La languedans tous ses états. Michel Malaise in honorem = Acta Orientalia Belgica 18, 243–254.

Brixhe – Hodot 1988 = Cl. Brixhe – R. Hodot, L’Asie Mineure du nord au sud. Inscrip-tions inédites.

Cuvigny 1997 = H. Cuvigny, Le crépuscule d’un dieu: le déclin du culte de Pan dans le désertOriental, BIFAO 97, 139–147.

Cuvigny et al. 2003 = H. Cuvigny (ed.) – J.-P. Brun – A. Bülow-Jacobsen – D. Cardon –J.-L. Fournet – M. Leguilloux – M.-A. Matelly – M. Reddé, La route de Myos Hormos.L’armée romaine dans le désert Oriental d’Égypte (Praesidia du désert de Bérénice I).

Cuvigny et al. (forthcoming) = H. Cuvigny (ed.) – J.-P. Brun – A. Bülow-Jacobsen –D. Cardon – H. Éristov – H. Granger-Taylor – M. Leguilloux – W. Nowik –M. Reddé – M. Tengberg, Didymoi. Une garnison romaine dans le désert Orientald’Égypte. Vol. I. Les fouilles et le matériel. Vol. II. Les textes (Praesidia du désert de BéréniceIV).

Drexl 1941 = F. Drexl, Ein griechisches Losbuch, ByzZ 41, 311–318.Evans 1994 = E. Evans, Military Architects and Building Design in Roman Britain, Britan-

nia 25, 143–164.Frankfurter 1998 = D. Frankfurter, Religion in Roman Egypt. Assimilation and Resis-

tance.Graf 2005 = F. Graf, Rolling the Dice for Answer, in: S. I. Johnston – P. T. Struck (ed.),

Mantikê. Studies in Ancient Divination, 51–97.Heberdey 1932 = R. Heberdey, Zu den kleinasiatischen Astragalenorakeln, WS 50, 1932,

82–95.I.Akôris = É. Bernand, Inscriptions grecques et latines d’Akôris, 1988.I.Did. = Inscriptions from Didymoi, to be published in: Cuvigny et al. (forthcoming), vol. II.I.Pan = A. Bernand, Pan du désert, 1977.Lupa = Database Ubi erat Lupa (http://www.ubi-erat-lupa.org/).Naour 1980 = Chr. Naour, Tyriaion en Cabalide: épigraphie et géographie historique.Nollé 2007 = J. Nollé, Kleinasiatische Losorakel. Astragal- und Alphabetchresmologien der

hochkaiserzeitlichen Orakelrenaissance.O.Did. = Ostraca from Didymoi, to be published in: Cuvigny et al. (forthcoming), vol. II.Ronchi, Lexicon = G. Ronchi, Lexicon theonymon rerumque sacrarum et divinarum ad

Aegyptum pertinentium quae in papyris ostracis titulis graecis latinisque in Aegypto repertislaudantur, 1974–1977.

Stoll 2001 = O. Stoll, Ordinatus Architectus. Römische Militärarchitekten und ihre Bedeu-tung für den Technologietransfer, in: id., Römisches Heer und Gesellschaft, 300–368.

Tomber 2006 = R. Tomber, The Pottery, in: V. A. Maxfield – D. P. S. Peacock (ed.), MonsClaudianus, Survey and Excavation III. Ceramic Vessels and Related Objects, 3–235.


Fig. 1: The Roman roads in the Eastern Desert (drawing by J.-P. Brun)


Fig. 2: Plan of Dios (drawing by J.-P. Brun, M. Reddé, E. Botte)


Fig. 3: No. 1

Fig. 4: The aedes in its surroundings (photograph by J.-P. Brun)


Fig. 5a: Schematic plan of the aedes (drawing by J.-P. Brun)


Fig.

5b: A

-B se

ction

of th

e aed

es, l

ooki

ng so

uth

(dra

win

g by J

.-P. B

run)


Fig. 6: The aedes, phase 5 (photograph by J.-P. Brun)


Fig. 8: The podium seen from above (photograph by J.-P. Brun)

Fig 7: Receptacle at the southern end of the podium (photograph by J.-P. Brun)


Fig 10: The podium at the time of the discovery. Against its façade, the fragmentary Aegyptian-stylestatue. On the sand, a fragmentary stela coarsely representing Zeus Helios Megas Sarapis

(the head was retrieved in cistern 3) and a rectangular plate originally belonging to the decoration ofthe podium, with graffiti n° 9-10 (photograph by J.-P. Brun).

Fig 9: The brick floor, phase 7 (photograph by J.-P. Brun)


Fig. 12: No. 3

Fig. 11: No. 2


Fig. 14: No. 5–7

Fig. 13: No. 4


Fig. 16: No. 9–10

Fig. 15: No. 8


Fig. 18: No. 12

Fig. 17: No. 11


Fig. 20: No. 14

Fig. 19: No. 13


Fig. 22: No. 16

Fig. 21: No. 15


Fig. 23: No. 17


Fig. 25: No. 19

Fig. 24: No. 18


Fig. 26: No. 20

Fig. 27: No. 21


Fig. 29: No. 23

Fig. 28: No. 22

Der CHIRON wird jahrgangsweise und in Leinen gebunden ausgeliefert.Bestellungen nehmen alle Buchhandlungen entgegen.

Verlag: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/New YorkDruck und buchbinderische Verarbeitung: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen

Anschrift der Redaktion: Kommission für Alte Geschichte und Epigraphik desDeutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Amalienstr. 73b, D-80799 München

[email protected]

« The Shrine in the Praesidium of Dios (Eastern Desert of Egypt): Graffiti and Oracles in...

Documents

Transcript of « The Shrine in the Praesidium of Dios (Eastern Desert of Egypt): Graffiti and Oracles in...